1 


I 


AT   LOS  ANGELES 


THE  GIFT  OF 

MAY  TREAT  MORRISON 

IN  MEMORY  OF 

ALEXANDER  F  MORRISON 


r' 


I*'    // 


PRACTICAL   ESSAYS 
ON   AMERICAN    GOVERNMENT 


practical  £00a^0 


on 


American    (3ovcrnment 


J  3»3>V|  •3J3"»  "JiJ^ 

BY 


ALBERT    BUSHNELL    HART,  Ph.D. 

OF   HARVARD   UNIVERSITY 

Author  of  ^^Epoch  Maps,''''  '■'•Formation  of  tJie  Utiion,''''  "  Intro 
duction  to  the  Study  of  Federal  Government,''''  etc. 


IRew  lor?? 
LONGMANS,    GREEN,   AND   CO. 

1894 


J  3     >  J  J  i  >>  3 


J    J     J  ' 

«    *    3    J    • 


5     3        33''' 

>         3      3  J      3     3 


3    J    J    ,>  >3 
5>  ''3 


*        fc     ♦  "^  J 


v:^> 


Copyright,  1893,  bv 
LONGMANS,  GREEN,  AND  CO. 


TROW   DIRECTORY 

PRINTING  AND   BOOKBINDING  COMPANY 

NEW  YORK 


c    c  c   c 


..<^  c,  c  c  « 


€  c 


C     C    C         C       I 

t  r   c      <•   (   c 


PREFACE.  )\t.6J0J 

These  essays,  with  the  exception  of  that  on 
the  Chilean  question,  have  been  gathered  up  from 
various  periodicals  in  which  they  have  appeared 
during  the  last  half  dozen  years.  They  are  studies 
of  detached  phases  of  the  subject  which  most  in- 
terests the  author — the  actuaJ_working_o£^overr^^^ 
ment  in  the  United  States.  Perhaps  the  term 
"  practtcal:-e5Says"''~TTueds''^planation  :  4t_ means 
"Ilb£-l]^^^:LlJ?e  essays_aimjrather  to  describe  things 
as  they  are  than  to  sngo-est  what  they  ought  to  be. 

^  Yet  in  political  affairs  it  is  especially  dif^cult  to 
get  below  the  surface,  and  to  distinguish  effective 
muscle  and  tendon  from  the  inert  matter  which 
surrounds  them.  I  cannot  hope  to  have  avoided 
mistakes  which  will  be  evident  to  those  officially 
•     engaged  in  the  public  service.     I  have  at  least  en- 

^    deavored  to  profit  by  the  criticisms  passed  upon 

o    nie"^iTdtvTdT3aressays~aiThe]rappea  have 

brought  them  down  to  date,  so  far  as  new  ma- 
terial was  accessible. 

Acknowledgments  are  due  to  the  editors  and 

^  publishers  of  the  Atlantic  Monthly^  Forum,  Politi- 
cal Scieiice  Quarterly,  Neiv  England  Magadne, 
Neiv  Revieiv,  Chautauquan,  Quarterly  Journal 
of  Economics,  and  Magazine  of  American  History, 
for  their  kind  permission  to  reprint  articles. 

Albert  Bushnell  Hart. 

Cambridge,  July  i,  1893. 


(VI 
DC 


•% 


in 


TABLE   OF  CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

I.    The  Speaker  as  Premier, i 

Atlantic  Monthly,  March,  189I. 

II.     The  Exercise  of  the  Suffrage, 20 

Political  Science  Quarterly,  June,  1892. 

III.  The  Election  of  a  President, 58 

New  Review,  November,  1892. 

IV.  Do  the  People  wish  Civil  Service  Reform  ?    .      81 

Forwn,  March,  1890, 
V.    The  Chilean  Controversy  :  A  Study  in  Amer- 
ican Diplomacy,       98 

VI.     The  Colonial  Town  Meeting, 133 

Chautauquan,  November,  1891. 

VII.    The  Colonial  Shire, 147 

Ckautauquan,  December,  1891. 

VIII.     The  Rise  of  American  Cities, 162 

Quarterly  Jotinml  of  Economics,  January,  1890. 
IX.    The  Biography  of  a  River  and  Harbor  Bill,   .     206 
Magazine  of  American   History,    July,    1887 ; 
Papers  of  the  Atnerican  Historical  Association, 
1888. 
X.    The  Public  Land  Policy  of  the  United  States,    233 
Quarterly  Journal  of  Econo/iiics,  January,  1887. 
XI.     Why  the  South  was  defeated  in  the  Civil 

War, 258 

N'ew  England  Magazine,  November,  189 1. 

INDEX, 299 


1. 

THE    SPEAKER  AS  PREMIER. 


During  the  last  half  dozen  years  American 
newspapers  have  fallen  into  the  habit,  half  jocose 
and  halt  complimentary,  of  calling  the  Secretary 
of  State  the  Premier.  At  the  same  time,  a  small 
and  very  earnest  band  of  men  have  urged  upon  the 
country  the  adoption  of  something  resembling  the 
English  parliamentary  system,  with  a  prime  min- 
ister at  the  head.  Both  the  wits  and  the  reform- 
ers have  failed  to  observe  that  there  has  actually 
grown  up  within  our  system  of  government  an 
officer  who  possesses  and  exercises  the  most  im- 
portant powers  entrusted  to  the  head  of  the  ad- 
ministration of  England.  This  insistence  upon  a 
development  which  has  not  taken  place,  and  neg- 
lect to  notice  one  of  the  most  remarkable  phenom- 
ena of  our  constitutional  growth,  perhaps  is  due 
to  a  confusion  as  to  the  real  place  and  powers  of 
the  English  prime  minister.  I  shall  attempt,  there- 
fore, to  set  forth  what  he  may  do,  and  how  far  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  stands 
in  his  place. 

(I) 


iSeen^s  on  ©ovcrnment. 


The    English    Premfe'r/oi-  prime    minister,  —  a 
title  unknown  to  the  law,— is'the  person  acting  as 
the  official   head  of  the  party,  or  combination  of 
parties,  having  a  majority  in  the  House  of  Com- 
mons.    There  is  no  formal  election.     The  Queen 
summons  the  man  whom   she  believes  to  be  best 
possessed  of  the  confidence  of  his  party  ;  and  if  he 
succeed  in  inducing  a  suf^cient  number  of  his  fel- 
low-members in   either  house  to   take  office  with 
him,  and  if  the  other  members  of  the  party  tacitly 
accept  the  ministry  thus  formed,  the  Premier  re- 
mains in  power  until  he  is  no  longer  able  to  com- 
mand a  majority  in  the  Commons.     The  popular 
title  of  Premier  is  well  applied,  since  its  possessor 
is  at  the  same  time  the  head    of  the    executive 
power  of  the  nation  and  the  leader  of  Parliament. 
In  the  first  capacity  he  is  responsible  for  the  acts 
of  all  his  colleagues,   unless   he    disavows   them. 
He  takes  counsel   with  the  other  ministers,  and 
their   resolutions    upon  certain    subjects  of  detail 
have,  under  the  name  of  Orders   in  Council,  the 
force  of  law.     The  foreign  policy  of  the    nation, 
the  maintenance  of  internal  peace,  the  execution 
of  laws,  are  subject  to  the  ministry,  and  in  the  ac- 
tion of  the  ministry  he  must  lead,  or  lose  prestige. 

The  second  great  function  of  the  Premier  is  that 
of  leader  of  Parliament.  The  ministry  bring  for- 
ward a  series  of  government  propositions,  which 
have  precedence  over  bills  introduced  directly  by 
private  members.      Not   only   are  the  important 


Zbc  Speaker  as  ipremfcr. 


bills  introduced  by  the  ministry;  the  order  in 
which  they  shall  be  brought  forward  and  pressed 
to  a  vote  is  also  decided  by  the  ministry,  who 
form,  therefore,  practically  a  committee  of  both 
houses  on  a  legislative  programme.  The  Pre- 
mier is  usually  one  of  the  best  debaters  in  Parlia- 
ment, able  to  defend  his  ministry  against  criticism 
upon  their  executive  action  and  against  attack 
upon  their  bills.  Should  the  House  of  Commons 
at  any  time  refuse  to  accept  a  government  meas- 
ure upon  which  the  ministry  insist,  or  should  it 
adopt  a  different  order  of  business  from  that  laid 
down  as  a  government  programme,  the  ministry, 
by  long-established  custom,  must  immediately  re- 
sign. 

Under  the  American  system  of  government,  the 
two  functions  of  the  English  ministry  are  also  ex- 
ercised ;  but  by  the  deliberate  action  of  the  fram- 
ers  of  the  Constitution  those  duties  are  divided. 
Whether  or  no  the  parliamentary  system  is  better 
than  our  own,  it  is  certainly  precluded  by  the  Con- 
stitution as  it  stands,  and  does  not  obtain  in  any 
State  of  the  Union.  The  executive  duties  per- 
formed in  England  by  the  Premier,  in  the  United 
States  are  performed  by  the  President.  The  Sec- 
retary of  State  is  constitutionally  a  subordinate  of 
the  President,  and  stands  upon  the  same  footing 
as  the  other  cabinet  ministers,  with  the  single 
exception  that  by  the  act  of  1886  he  is  the  first 
named  in  the  succession  to  the  presidency,  in  case 


message  on  Government. 


of  lapse  through  the  death  or  disability  of  both 
President  and  Vice-President.  By  long-estab- 
lished custom  he  is  usually,  although  not  invari- 
ably, a  recognized  leader  of  the  party  to  which  the 
President  belongs.  It  is  the  President,  however, 
through  whom  the  unity  of  the  administration  is 
preserved  ;  it  is  the  President  alone  who  can  de- 
cide between  conflicting  policies  or  conflicting  acts 
of  his  secretaries.  Not  only  has  Congress  no 
power  to  interfere  with  the  acts  of  the  President 
or  to  cause  his  resignation  ;  it  cannot  cause  the 
dismissal  of  any  of  his  secretaries  or  their  subor- 
dinates. On  the  other  hand,  the  President  and 
his  secretaries  have  no  powers  of  control  or  direc- 
tion over  either  house  of  Congress.  In  accordance 
with  an  early  and  unfortunate  custom,  all  com- 
munications between  the  cabinet  ministers  and 
Congress  are  made  in  writing.  One  day  in  Au- 
gust, 1789,  President  Washington  appeared  in  the 
Senate  with  General  Knox,  the  Secretary  of  War, 
and  announced  that  the  latter  would  explain  to 
the  Senate  a  scheme  of  Indian  treaties.  The  Sen- 
ate, uneasy  at  the  presence  both  of  President  and 
Secretary,  referred  the  matter  to  a  committee. 
Knox  returned  alone,  a  few  days  later ;  but  since 
that  time  it  does  not  appear  that  any  cabinet 
officer  has  been  heard  in  either  house ;  and  since 
1 801  the  Presidents  have  made  their  communica- 
tions in  writing.  Secretary  Blaine  is  reported  to 
have  said  that  he  would  give  two  years  of  his  life 


^be  Speaker  as  fircmfcr.  5 

for  an  opportunity  to  debate  in  Congress  a  meas- 
ure which  he  considered  of  prime  importance.  A 
rule  of  either  house  would  at  any  time  establish 
the  custom  of  listening  to  ministers,  and  would 
thus  prevent  much  jarring  and  disharmony. 
Neither  house  has  ever  shown  any  disposition  to 
pass  such  a  rule. 

The  congressional  system  has  led  to  a  great 
practical  inconvenience.  At  the  beginning  both 
houses  were  small  :  the  House  had  but  fifty-three 
members,  the  Senate  but  twenty-two.  They  legis- 
lated for  a  people  of  four  millions,  for  the  most 
part  in  agricultural  communities.  The  Senate 
now  has  eighty-eight  members,  the  House  three 
hundred  and  fifty-six.  They  represent  a  people 
of  sixty-seven  millions,  with  many  varied  interests. 
The  subjects  of  legislation  have,  therefore,  steadily 
increased,  and  the  quantity  of  legislation  has  grown 
even  in  greater  proportion.  In  Washington's  first 
administration,  1789-93,  196  acts  were  presented 
for  the  President's  signature;  in  Cleveland's  first 
administration,  1885-89,  about  3,700  acts  went 
through  both  houses  of  Congress  and  were  sub- 
mitted for  executive  approval.  This  enormous 
mass  of  legislation  has  taxed  to  the  utmost  the 
digestive  powers  of  Congress.  Measures  of  great 
public  moment  have  failed  to  be  considered,  or 
have  failed  to  pass,  on  account  of  the  confusion 
and  crush  of  public  business ;  and  the  closing 
days  of  each    Congress  have  witnessed  scenes  of 


Bssa^s  en  Government. 


reckless  voting  on  measures  hardly  read  or  not  un- 
derstood, which  must  be  carried  through  within  a 
few  hours  or  fail  altogether.  An  examination  of 
the  statute  books  shows  that  in  the  administra- 
tions of  Hayes  and  Arthur  about  one-fifth  of  the 
acts  of  Congress  received  the  President's  signature 
in  the  last  three  days  of  the  final  sessions ;  in 
Cleveland's  first  administration  about  one-ninth. 
President  Arthur  signalized  the  last  three  days  of 
his  term  by  signing  217  bills.  President  Cleve- 
land, on  INIarch  i  and  2,  1889,  signed  162  bills. 

Very  early  in  the  history  of  Congress  it  was  seen 
that  it  was  impossible  for  the  House  as  a  body  to 
examine  all  the  bills  submitted.  In  the  Conti- 
nental Congress  and  the  Confederation  there  had 
already  been  established  a  system  of  select  and 
standing  committees  for  the  consideration  of  spe- 
cial branches  of  legislation,  and  for  the  preparation 
of  bills.  For  instance,  the  celebrated  Northwest 
Ordinance  of  1787  was  reported  by  a  select  com- 
mittee. As  the  system  of  responsible  ministers 
was  not  adopted,  and  as  the  houses  deliberately 
chose  to  deprive  themselves  of  the  presence  and 
voices  of  the  President's  advisers,  the  committee 
system  was  continued  without  much  consideration. 
For  many  years  business  Avas  assigned  usually  to 
select  committees.  The  first  standing  committee 
of  the  House  was  formed  in  1789;  in  1 812  there 
were  but  nine.  As  the  business  of  Congress  in- 
creased, the  number  of  the  committees  increased 


^be  Speaher  as  ipuemicr. 


in  like  ratio.  There  are,  in  1893,  forty-nine  stand- 
ing committees  in  the  House  and  forty-four  in  the 
Senate ;  besides  twenty-five  so-called  select  com- 
mittees, which  do  not  essentially  differ  from  the 
standing  committees.  Each  Congress  frames  its 
own  rules,  but  it  is  usual  to  adopt  the  classifica- 
tion of  committees  which  has  already  been  found 
convenient.  Those  members  who  are  re-elected 
are  likely  again  to  receive  appointment  to  the 
committees  on  which  they  have  served  in  the  pre- 
vious Congresses.  In  this  way  there  is  established 
a  certain  continuity  of  service  and  of  position. 
The  chairmen  of  the  committees  and  the  majority 
of  the  members  of  each  committee  are  always  of 
the  dominant  party.  So  important  is  the  com- 
mittee work  considered  that  there  is  a  fierce  strife 
among  the  members  to  secure  valued  appoint- 
ments, and  men  have  often  won  great  reputation 
as  successful  administrators  in  important  commit- 
tees. Thus  the  late  Samuel  J.  Randall  was  for 
many  years  chairman  of  the  powerful  Committee 
on  Appropriations. 

Although  the  business  of  Congress  and  the 
number  and  complexity  of  the  committees  have 
increased,  the  number  of  days  in  the  year  has  re- 
mained constant.  The  committees  have  learned 
by  long  experience  that  a  measure  upon  which 
they  have  spent  much  time  in  the  perfection  of 
details  may  at  last  fail  for  simple  want  of  consid- 
eration in  one  of  the  houses.     There  is,  therefore, 


8  'Bssn^6  on  (Bovernmcnt. 


a  constant  and  increasing  strife  between  the  chair- 
men of  committees  for  the  possession  of  the  floor 
and  the  opportunity  to  report  their  bills,  although 
they  are  members  of  the  same  party,  and  usually 
not  unfriendly  to  each  other.     The  result  is  that 
a  very  appreciable  portion  of  the  time,  especially 
of  the  House  of  Representatives,  is  spent  in  fight- 
insr  for  the  floor.     One  committee  and  its  meas- 
ures  stands  in  the  way  of  another,  and  it  is  nearly 
impossible  for  the    House  to  select  between  two 
rival  measures  that  which  it  desires  to  consider 
first.     When  sweeping  measures  are  reported,  in- 
volving great  party  principles,  and  likely  to  affect 
approaching  elections,  Congress  usually  spends  a 
considerable  part  of  its  time  in  discussing  which 
shall  be  discussed.     Days  may  pass  without  any 
appreciable  advance  in  the  business  of  the  houses. 
The  sixty  committees  have  their  own  interests  and 
their  own  favorite  projects,  which  seem  larger  to 
them  than  great   party  measures.     The  result  is 
confusion,  waste  of  time,  failure  to  consider  bills, 
and  a  consequent  legislative  stampede  at  the  end 
of  the  session,  in  which  the  good  and  deserving 
measures,  in  which  the  House  is  sincerely  inter- 
ested,  are  more  apt  to  be  trampled  down   than 
private  measures,  urged  by  a  few  persistent  mem- 
bers. 

With  all  its  evils,  the  committee  system  in  two 
ways  relieves  the  House  from  the  pressure  of 
legislation.     In  the  first  place,  no  bill  can  be  con- 


c:be  Speaker  as  ipremfer. 


sidered  without  having  passed  through  a  commit- 
tee and  having  been  reported  by  it.  The  result  is 
the  strangling  of  eight-tenths  of  the  bills  presented 
to  Congress.  In  the  Fiftieth  Congress,  1887-89, 
there  were  introduced  into  the  House  no  less  than 
12,933  bills  and  joint  resolutions.  Of  these,  9,632 
were  never  heard  of  again  after  having  been  re- 
ferred to  a  committee,  leaving  3,301  which  received 
some  sort  of  consideration.  Only  1,605  passed  the 
House,  and  of  these  only  1,385  passed  the  Senate. 
Nearly  nine-tenths  of  the  bills  introduced  had  thus 
failed  at  some  stage  before  presentation  for  the 
President's  signature.  The  pigeon-holes  of  the 
committees  are  the  resting-places  of  many  thou- 
sands of  unfledged  measures.  In  the  second  place, 
the  committees  digest  and  arrange  the  details  of 
measures,  and  many  important  bills,  especially 
those  correcting  defects  found  in  the  working  of 
the  government,  go  through  Congress  substan- 
tially as  reported  by  the  committees.  It  is  here 
that  the  cabinet  ministers  exercise  their  only  di- 
rect influence  on  legislation.  They  appear  before 
the  committees,  urge  and  explain  particular  meas- 
ures, and  not  infrequently  submit  drafts  of  bills, 
which  are  accepted  almost  verbatim  by  the  com- 
mittee, and  afterward  by  Congress.  The  great 
dififlculty  has  been  the  lack  of  some  institution  to 
unify  legislation.  The  bill  reported  by  Committee 
B  might  unwittingly  repeal  the  bill  passed  yester- 
day on  report  of  Committee  A;  or  the  House  is 


10  lEssa^s  on  (Bovernment. 

called  upon  to  spend  its  brief  and  valuable  time 
in  settling  questions  in  dispute  between  commit- 
tees— questions  upon  which  an  agreement  ought 
to  have  been  reached  before  any  report  was  ren- 
dered. 

That  some  relief  must  be  obtained  from  such 
confusion  and  perplexity  statesmen  have  long 
agreed.  They  have  not  seen  so  clearly  that,  by 
a  process  of  silent  development,  there  was  being 
evolved  a  power  which  could  simplify  and  unify  the 
legislative  process.  That  power  is  the  Speaker, 
and  he  has  reached  his  present  importance  by  the 
absorption,  based  on  the  consent  of  the  House,  of 
six  successive  sets  of  powers. 

The  first  Speaker,  chosen  in  1789,  was  simply  a 
moderator.  His  duty  was  like  that  of  other  pre- 
siding officers — to  apply  the  rules  of  the  House  so 
as  to  give  the  fairest  opportunity  of  discussion, 
and  to  permit  the  freest  expression  of  the  will  of 
the  House.  The  Speakers  of  some  of  the  colonial 
assemblies  had  been  distinctly  party  leaders  ;  and 
after  national  parties  were  organized — that  is,  from 
about  1793 — the  Speakers  were  chieftains  of  great 
influence  in  their  party,  but  they  still  felt  them- 
selves simply  to  be  moderators. 

The  second  access  of  power  came  through  the 
appointment  of  committees.  The  House  for  one 
year  tried  the  experiment,  which  the  Senate  has 
successfully  carried  on  to  the  present  day,  of  choos- 
ing committees  by  ballot;  but  in  January,  1790, 


Zbc  Speaker  as  ipreinlev.  n 


they  voted  to  give  this  power  to  the  Speaker. 
So  long  as  the  number  of  committees  was  small 
and  committee  positions  were  little  sought  for, 
this  was  still  rather  an  administrative  than  a  po- 
litical power.  As  committee  government  grew, 
the  power  of  the  Speaker  to  give  opportunities  of 
distinction  to  his  party  friends  also  increased.  By 
about  1840  the  great  influence  of  the  committees 
was  distinctly  recognized  :  first  in  shaping  legisla- 
tion ;  and  then  in  preventing  legislation,  by  refus- 
ing to  report  bills  to  which  the  committee  was  op- 
posed, but  which  the  House  might  have  approved. 
The  Speaker  began  to  assert  a  control  over  legis- 
lation through  his  power  to  appoint  committees. 
Thus,  in  the  choice  of  Speaker  in  1849,  a  candi- 
date who  was  on  the  point  of  being  chosen  lost 
the  election,  because  it  appeared  that  he  had 
promised  to  constitute  certain  committees  to  the 
dissatisfaction  of  some  of  his  party.  The  principle 
once  completely  established  made  the  Speaker 
next  in  dignity  and  power  to  the  President.  He 
could  decide  at  the  beginning  of  the  session  what 
measures  should  not  be  brought  to  the  attention 
of  Congress  ;  and  he  could  have  great  influence, 
through  the  committees,  in  the  preliminary  shap- 
ing of  the  measures  which  would  be  submitted. 
There  were,  however,  two  practical  restrictions 
upon  this  power  :  it  was  to  be  exercised  not  for 
his  personal  advantage  and  advancement  so  much 
as  for  the  party  which  made  him  Speaker ;  and  the 


12  36633^3  on  Government. 

members  of  the  committees,  once  appointed,  felt 
no  direct  sense  of  responsibility  to  the  Speaker, 
and  thus  might  report  measures  to  which  he  was 
personally  opposed. 

The  period  of  the  civil  war  did  much  to 
strengthen  the  powers  of  Congress  at  the  expense 
of  other  departments ;  it  also  gave  to  the  Speaker 
greater  opportunities,  both  through  the  appoint- 
ment of  committees  and  through  personal  influ- 
ence. The  speakership  became  more  and  more 
desirable,  not  only  for  itself,  but  because  it  was  an 
avenue  to  the  presidency.  Speaker  Colfax  was 
chosen  Vice-President  in  1868.  His  successor. 
Speaker  Blaine,  became  a  candidate  for  the  nomi- 
nation in  1876.  But  the  third  development  of  the 
Speaker's  power  rose  rather  out  of  the  increasing 
pressure  for  the  "  floor  ;  "  that  is,  for  the  opportu- 
nity to  take  part  in  debate.  There  had  been  many 
cases  in  the  history  of  Congress  where  members 
had  been  silenced,  or  the  attempt  had  been  made 
to  silence  them,  by  the  infliction  of  some  disci- 
pline. Such  were  the  attempted  censures  of  John 
Quincy  Adams  in  1832,  1837,  and  1842.  The 
rules  had  often  been  interpreted  so  as  to  cut  off  an 
obnoxious  debater,  as  in  the  case  of  the  first  great 
abolition  speech  in  Congress,  in  December,  1837. 
Somewhere  between  1880  and  1890  there  grew  up 
the  practice  of  the  Speaker's  refusing  to  recognize 
members  because  they  had  some  propositions  to 
bring  forward  obnoxious  to  his  party.     When,  in 


XLbc  Speaker  as  ipremter.  13 

1887,  a  member  wrote  to  Speaker  Carlisle,  asking 
that  he  might  be  recognized  to  move  a  repeal  of 
the  tobacco  tax,  the  Speaker  replied  that  he  could 
not  consent  to  entertain  a  motion  against  which 
the  caucus  of  the  party  having  a  majority  in  the 
House  had  pronounced  itself.  The  Speaker  as- 
sumed the  right,  sanctioned  by  precedent,  to  re- 
fuse to  permit  a  hearing  for  a  proposition  contrary 
to  the  principles  of  his  party.  The  history  of  the 
session  shows  that  the  minority  was  free  to  intro- 
duce propositions  and  amendments,  and  that  the 
restriction  was  not  invariably  applied  to  members 
of  the  majority.  The  principle  which  Mr.  Carlisle 
seems  to  lay  down  is  that  the  Speaker  is  a  party 
chief,  bound,  so  far  as  members  of  his  own  party 
are  concerned,  to  carry  out  the  policy  accepted  by 
the  party  in  caucus  or  by  general  agreement.  Mr. 
Carlisle  expressed  his  purpose  more  openly  than 
any  of  his  predecessors  had  done.  The  power  was 
a  familiar  one,  and  has  since  been  regularly  exer- 
cised. 

From  this  point  there  is  but  a  short  step  to  the 
fourth  advance,  the  practice  of  refusing  to  recog- 
nize members  because  they  are  personally  obnox- 
ious to  the  Speaker.  During  the  last  thirty  years 
members  have  sometimes  sat  through  an  entire 
session,  or  even  through  two  sessions  of  Congress, 
without  ever  being  able  to  catch  the  Speaker's 
eye.  Their  only  opportunity  has  been  that  of 
presenting  bills  on  the  call  by  States,  or  of  discus- 


14  iSesti^s  on  (Sovcrnment. 

sion  in  committees.  At  the  adjournment  of  Con- 
gress in  1887,  a  member  from  Nebraska,  who  had 
a  bill  for  a  public  building  in  his  district,  and  who 
could  not  obtain  the  Speaker's  recognition,  walked 
for  two  hours  up  and  down  in  front  of  the  desk, 
entreating,  cajoling,  and  ejaculating,  and  in  the 
end  tore  his  bill  into  fragments,  and  deposited 
them  as  a  protest  at  the  Speaker's  feet.  In  all 
formal  discussions,  no  member,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  accepted  party  leaders,  need  expect  to 
be  heard  unless  he  has  previously  requested  the 
Speaker  to  recognize  him  ;  and  arbitrary  Speak- 
ers do  not  hesitate  to  deny  the  applications  of  men 
whom  they  personally  dislike. 

Side  by  side  with  these  successive  developments 
has  grown  up  a  fifth  undefined  but  effective  power 
of  the  Speaker.  By  his  power  to  state  questions, 
to  decide  points  of  order,  to  control  the  formal 
business  of  the  House,  as  well  as  by  his  immense 
personal  influence,  the  Speaker  has  practically  ac- 
quired a  veto  on  any  proposition  brought  to  the 
attention  of  the  House.  The  first  precaution  of  a 
canny  member  is  to  assure  himself  that  the  Speak- 
er will  not  oppose  his  bill;  if  that  assurance  can- 
not be  obtained,  either  directly  or  through  the 
influence  of  other  members,  there  is  practically  no 
hope  of  securing  its  passage. 

The  powers  of  the  Speaker  thus  developed,  as 
moderator,  as  party  chief,  as  the  appointer  of  com- 
mittees,  as  the  dispenser  of  the  right  of  taking 


XLbc  Speaker  as  ipremiei.  i5 

part  in  debate,  and  as  possessor  of  a  veto  power, 
have  made  the  Speaker's  place  more  and  more 
important,  and  more  and  more  desired.  But  his 
authority  has  been  negative  rather  than  positive  ; 
the  Speaker  could  prevent  legislation,  but  he  could 
secure  none  without  a  majority  of  the  House.  The 
Speaker  might  deny  the  floor,  but  he  seldom  occu- 
pied it.  Henry  Clay,  the  most  distinguished  and 
popular  Speaker  of  the  House,  who  was  six  times 
elected,  and  never  had  one  of  his  decisions  re- 
versed, was  accustomed  to  take  active  part  in  the 
debate.  This  practice  has  now  become  very  rare. 
The  Speaker  has,  however,  had  a  large  share  in 
determining  the  policy  of  his  party  in  caucus,  and 
in  holding  the  party  to  that  policy.  His  power 
of  appointing  to  committees  has  made  his  favor 
desirable.  His  prestige  as  Speaker,  when  backed 
by  personal  qualities  of  character  and  leadership, 
has  made  him  by  far  the  most  important  figure 
in  Congress,  and  the  second  figure  in  the  nation. 
The  abler  Speakers  have  had  within  their  own 
party  a  political  influence  and  predominance  quite 
comparable  with  the  party  position  of  the  English 
Premier, 

The  sixth  and  most  important  step  in  welding 
together  the  powers  of  the  Speaker  and  in  correct- 
ing the  defects  of  the  congressional  system  has 
been  taken  within  the  past  few  years.  The 
Speaker,  and  a  few  other  eminent  members  from 
his  own  party,  have  been  constituted,  by  the  con- 


lo  lEssa^s  on  ©overnmcnt. 

sent  of  that  party,  an  informal  committee  to  de- 
cide upon  an  order  of  business.  The  commission 
of  the  Speaker  rests  simply  upon  the  fact  that  he 
has  been  chosen  by  the  members  of  his  party  in 
the  House  as  their  legislative  leader.  Without 
precisely  intending  to  create  a  new  or  a  more  pow- 
erful authority,  the  recent  majorities  have  thus 
committed  themselves  to  the  practice  of  entrust- 
ing to  a  small  body,  in  which  the  Speaker  must  be 
the  predominant  member,  the  direction  not  only 
of  the  policy  of  the  party,  but  of  the  legislation  of 
the  House.  The  step  is  in  no  way  connected 
with  the  peculiar  principles  either  of  the  Republi- 
can or  of  the  Democratic  party.  It  is  a  natural 
and  a  desirable  solution  of  the  dif^culties  which 
have  long  beset  Congress.  The  Committee  on 
Rules,  which  now  exercises  this  power,  is  made 
up  of  the  Speaker  and  four  associates,  of  whom 
two  belong  to  the  minority,  and  are  practically 
excluded  even  from  the  routine  business  of  the 
committee.  The  code  of  rules  for  the  immediate 
government  of  the  House,  which  that  com.mittee 
pressed  in  1890  and  which  has  been  the  subject  of 
so  much  discussion,  is  the  least  interesting  part  of 
its  work,  because  it  had  no  necessary  force  after 
the  expiration  of  the  Fifty-first  Congress.  The 
important  and  the  permanent  service  of  that  com- 
mittee was  to  point  out  a  way  in  which  the  major- 
ity in  Congress  may  present  in  succession  those 
measures  upon   which  it  desires  to  have  a  vote. 


tibc  Speaker  as  ipiemier.  i7 


The  committee  is  superior  to  all  other  standing 
committees  in  Congress,  because  it  expresses  the 
general  will  of  the  party  as  to  whether  the  work 
of  those  standing  committees  shall  or  shall  not  be 
brought  to  the  attention  of  the  House.  The  man 
who  controls  or  is  most  powerful  in  that  commit- 
tee is,  therefore,  a  recognized  political  chief,  a  for- 
mulator  of  the  policy  of  the  party,  a  legislative 
Premier.     That  man  is  the  Speaker. 

The  parallel  between  the  English  and  the 
American  Premiers  is,  of  course,  by  no  means 
exact.  In  the  first  place,  our  Speaker  is  powerful 
only  in  the  House,  while  the  Premier,  through  his 
majority  in  the  House  of  Commons,  may,  and  fre- 
quently does,  overawe  the  House  of  Lords,  The 
Senate  is  not  bound  to  recognize  the  leadership  of 
the  Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives  ;  but 
even  here  there  is  an  evident  convenience  in  hav- 
ing a  party  chief,  capable  of  laying  down  a  policy 
of  successive  measures  and  of  urging  those  meas- 
ures through.  Whenever  hereafter  the  two  houses 
are  controlled  by  the  same  party,  it  is  probable 
that  some  junto,  of  which  the  Speaker  is  the  lead- 
ing member,  will  arrange  a  programme  of  legisla- 
tion for  both  houses.  A  second  difference  is  that 
the  Speaker  is  chosen  for  a  definite  term  of  two 
years,  unless  by  vote  compelled  sooner  to  resign  ; 
but  parties  in  the  United  States  are  much  more 
stable  than  in  England  ;  the  party  which  elects  the 
Speaker  invariably  holds  its  majority  to  the  end 

2 


1 8  Bseags  on  ©oveinnicut. 

of  that  Congress.  Nothing,  therefore,  but  the  dis- 
regard of  the  wish  of  his  own  followers  is  likely  to 
destroy  the  Speaker's  power  ;  and  when  his  fol- 
lowers no  longer  stand  by  him,  his  position  is 
much  like  that  of  the  Premier  against  whom  the 
House  of  Commons  has  passed  a  vote  of  want  of 
confidence.  The  Speaker  must  resign,  and  his 
political  influence  will  be  destroyed.  The  execu- 
tive part  of  the  Premier's  power  is  not  within 
reach  of  the  Speaker  ;  but  if  the  tradition  of  party 
action  through  the  Speaker  continues,  the  general 
policy  of  the  party  will  be  formed  so  as  to  include 
executive  action.  A  President  who  wishes  to 
stand  well  with  his  party  is  likely  to  aid  in  carry- 
ing out  the  programme  arranged  by  the  junto  of 
which  the  Speaker  is  the  leading  member. 

This  most  recent  addition  to  the  Speaker's 
power  has  not  been  conferred  by  the  recent  vote 
of  the  House  in  adopting  rules,  and  in  fact  is  not 
expressed  in  the  Constitution,  in  the  acts  of  Con- 
gress, or  in  the  rules  of  the  House.  It  is  a  natural 
growth,  and  part  of  the  tendency  throughout  the 
national,  state,  and  municipal  systems  to  put  re- 
sponsibility upon  individuals  rather  than  upon 
boards.  It  is  a  wholesome  reaction  from  a  di- 
vided irresponsibility  and  a  wasteful  system  of  con- 
ducting the  business  of  legislation.  It  secures  at 
least  the  consideration  of  the  measures  held  by  the 
leaders  of  the  majority  to  be  most  important. 
Those  measures  may  or  may  not  be  for  the  public 


Xlbc  Speaficr  as  ipremfer.  19 

good  ;  but  under  the  new  system  the  public  has 
a  better  opportunity  to  place  responsibility  upon 
those  members  of  Congress  who,  under  any  sys- 
tem, must  control  its  operations,  namely,  the  great 
leaders  of  the  majority.  The  system  is,  therefore, 
likely  to  be  continued  in  principle,  if  not  in  the 
same  form,  by  each  party  when  in  the  majority. 
The  powers  now  exercised  by  the  Speaker  will 
probably  be  exercised  by  each  succeeding  Speaker, 
and  will  somewhat  increase.  Since  the  legislative 
department  in  every  republic  constantly  tends  to 
gain  ground  at  the  expense  of  the  executive,  the 
Speaker  is  likely  to  become,  and  perhaps  is  already, 
more  powerful,  both  for  good  and  for  evil,  than 
the  President  of  the  United  States.  He  is  Pre- 
mier in  legislation  ;  it  is  the  business  of  his  party 
that  he  be  also  Premier  in  character,  in  ability,  in 
leadership,  and  in  statesmanship. 


IT. 

THE  EXERCISE  OF  THE  SUFFRAGE. 


In  the  rivalry  between  the  practical  man  and 
the  critic  in  political  matters,  the  latter  seems  just 
now  to  be  attracting  most  attention  ;  the  man  of 
affairs,  who  makes  the  best  of  institutions  as  he 
finds  them,  has  not  the  same  degree  of  public  con- 
fidence that  he  had  forty  years  ago,  when  the 
favorite  theme  of  the  orator  v/as  the  perfection 
of  the  American  system  of  free  government. 
Ever  since  the  end  of  Reconstruction  there  has 
been  a  most  useful  class  of  public-spirited  men, 
sometimes  in  politics  and  sometimes  outside, 
who  have  pointed  out  defects  and  suggested  im- 
provements. They  have  held  the  place  which 
the  prophets  took  in  Hebrew  history  :  their  mis- 
sion not  to  govern,  but  to  arouse;  their  cry  of 
"  Woe  unto  them  that  are  at  ease  in  Zion  !  "  has 
aroused  the  ill-will  of  the  slothful,  and  has  brought 
upon  the  critics  the  accusation  of  disloyalty  to 
American  institutions ;  but  they  have  persevered, 
and  to  them  is  due  the  great  success  of  two  re- 
forms.    The  first  is  the  firm  establishment  of  the 

(20) 


j£icvci6c  of  tbe  Suffrage.  21 

merit  system  ia  the  public  service  under  the  na- 
tional government,  which  has  been  effected,  not 
by  administrators  wishing  to  improve  their  office, 
but  rather  by  the  enlightened  insistence  of  private 
citizens,  acting  on  Congress.  The  second  reform, 
which  has  had  much  more  aid  from  men  in  politi- 
cal life,  has  restored  the  lost  secret  ballot  to  most 
of  the  states. 

So  aroused  are  the  people  by  these  two  great 
achievements,  that  any  reasonable  suggestion  of 
improvement  in  political  methods  finds  a  hearing. 
Everywhere  spring  up  schemes  of  minority  repre- 
sentation, of  election  of  senators  or  presidential  elec- 
tors by  direct  vote,  of  further  limitations  on  legis- 
latures. The  suffrage — the  manner  of  its  exercise 
and  its  protection — is  particularly  inviting  for  such 
suggestions,  since  it  is  everywhere  the  subject  of 
laws,  constitutional  or  statutory;  to  improve  the 
suffrage  by  making  it  more  truly  representative,  is 
to  rebuild  the  political  structure  on  a  better  foun- 
dation. One  plan,  which  has  been  very  much  dis- 
cussed since  it  was  suggested  by  Governor  Hill, 
of  New  York,  in  1889,  is  that  of  the  so-called  "com- 
pulsory voting."  '     This  remedy  seems  so  easy,  its 

^  See  the  governor's  messages  for  1SS9  and  1890  ;  also  the  re- 
port of  Judge  Havves  to  the  Republican  Club,  of  New  York,  in  the 
Daily  Continent,  March  2,  189 1  ;  a  pamphlet  by  Edward  M.  Shep- 
ard,  entitled  "Compulsory  Voting"  (1891)  ;  an  article  with  the 
same  title  by  F.  W.  Hqlls,  in  the  Annals  of  the  American  Acad- 
emy, April,  1891  ;  and  an  editorial  in  The  Nation,  April  28, 
1892. 


22  iBssn^s  on  Government. 

effect  is  described  as  so  likely  to  heal  the  evils  of 
American  politics,  that  it  seems  ungracious  to 
cling  to  the  present  system.  Government  in  the 
United  States,  it  is  alleged,  is  a  government  of  the 
minority  :  the  minority  of  the  voters  elect  the  rep- 
resentatives ;  and  a  very  small  minority  of  this  suc- 
cessful minority  designate  the  candidates.  What 
more  natural  than  to  pass  a  law  which  will  cause 
the  people  to  resume  their  control  ?  If  a  consid- 
erable proportion  of  the  voters  do  not  exercise 
their  right  of  suffrage,  why  not  put  a  legal  press- 
ure upon  them,  to  compel  them  to  take  the  re- 
sponsibility on  their  own  shoulders?  Then  will 
the  American  system  again  become  a  "  government 
of  the  people,  by  the  people  and  for  the  people." 

This  suggestion,  if  analyzed,  will  be  found  to 
rest  on  three  premises :  that  abstention  from  vot- 
ing is  a  political  danger,  and  a  danger  which  in- 
creases ;  that  a  government  may  properly  require 
an  expression  of  opinion  from  its  people ;  and  that 
compulsion  will  correct  the  evils  of  neglect  of  vot- 
ing. Not  one  of  these  premises  is  beyond  dispute  ; 
they  are  all  matters  not  so  much  of  theory  as  of 
experience  and  of  probability  based  on  experience. 
A  careful  examination  of  the  available  facts  will 
show  that  the  evil  is  much  less  than  has  been  as- 
sumed ;  that  suffrage  is  a  thing  which  ought  not 
to  be  imposed,  under  any  government  ;  and  that 
the  effect  of  compulsion  would  be  small,  and  rather 
against  than  favorable  to  good  government. 


lEjercise  of  tbe  Suffrage.  23 

Considering  the  money  that  is  spent  on  statisti- 
cal inquiry  and  the  importance  of  the  subject,  it 
ought  to  be  easy  to  find  out  how  many  persons 
are  entitled  to  the  suffrage  in  the  United  States, 
and  then  to  compare  it  with  the  known  number  of 
those  who  vote.  The  process  is,  however,  much 
like  that  of  the  astronomer  who  spends  most  of 
his  time  in  eliminating  causes  of  error  and  deter- 
mining the  personal  equation  of  his  observers ; 
and  some  of  the  results  must  rest  on  estimates. 
The  Massachusetts  census  of  1885  '  does  contain 
an  official  statement  for  that  State ;  the  eleventh 
national  census  has  now  furnished  an  important 
enumeration  of  men  of  voting  age,  native  and 
foreign,  in  1890;^  and  the  publications  of  the  ear- 
lier United  States  censuses  abound  in  figures  out 
of  which  some  of  the  necessary  data  may  be  com- 
puted or  inferred.  At  the  end  of  this  essay  will 
be  found  a  tabulation  of  facts  derived  from  these 
sources.  Perhaps  a  study  of  the  effect  of  condi- 
tions and  exclusions  on  the  suffrage  will  furnish 
the  best  basis  for  later  arguments. 

The  most  convenient  point  of  comparison  is  a 
presidential  election ;    here  the  votes   are   larger 

'  Census  of  Massachusetts,  1885,  Population  and  Social  Statis- 
tics, I.,  103-I13  ;  H.  G.  Wadlin,  Citizens  and  Aliens,  reprint  from 
Nineteenth  Annual  Report  of  the  Massachusetts  Bureau  of  Statis- 
tics of  Labor,  121-225. 

^  Census  Bulletins,  No.  175,  April  8,  1892  ;  No,  202,  August  13, 
1892. 


24  Bssags  on  Government. 


than  at  other  times,  and  it  is  easier  to  obtain  aver- 
>  age  results.  A  particularly  serviceable  election  is 
that  of  1880,  which  fell  in  a  census  3'ear,  and  thus 
gives  a  more  exact  basis  of  comparison.'  The 
population  of  the  United  States  in  that  year  was 
50,153,783.  From  this  number  we  must  make 
many  successive  deductions  before  we  reach  the 
number  of  qualified  voters.  First  must  come  out 
the  whole  population  of  the  territories  and  of  the 
District  of  Columbia.  The  remainder  is  49,371,- 
340.  Of  this  number  not  quite  half  must  be  de- 
ducted for  the  women.  In  1880  they  had  no  vote 
in  general  elections  in  any  State  ;  nor  does  Wy- 
oming now  add  more  than  15,000  female  voters.^ 
The  limited  suffrage  now  granted  to  women  in 
local  matters  in  various  forms  by  twenty-nine 
States  does  not  affect  the  figures  for  presidential 
elections.  Out  of  the  25,075,619  males  in  the 
States,  a  little  less  than  half,  12,568,891,  were 
twenty-one  years  of  age  or  more  ;  the  minors  are 
of  course  everywhere  excluded.  The  twelve  and 
a  half  millions  of  possible  voters  constitute  a  trifle 
over  one-fourth  of  the  population.  Next  to  the 
age  qualification  comes  that  of  citizenship.  Exact 
figures  are  not  here  attainable,  since  the  census  of 
1880  does  not  distinguish  Chinese  from  negroes  in 

'Tenth  Census,  I.,  passim. 

^  The  population  of  Wyoming  in  1890  was  60, 705.  Of  these, 
21,362  were  women  ;  and  of  the  women  perhaps  two-thirds  are  of 
voting  age. 


Bjerclee  of  tbc  Sutfraee.  25 


its  tables  on  this  subject ;  but  a  close  estimate  of 
this  irregularity  is  possible,  and  can  be  but  a  few 
thousands  out  of  the  way.'  There  appear  to  have 
been  in  the  States  3,056,000  foreign-born  adults  in 
1880.  The  remainder,  9,512,891,  are  born  citizens 
of  the  United  States  and  are  all  capable  of  voting 
except  as  hereinafter  specified.  Of  the  foreign- 
born  men  a  very  large  number  are  naturalized 
citizens.  Upon  this  subject  we  have  the  results 
of  the  Census  investigation  of  1890,  which  shows 
the  number  naturalized  to  be  58.6  per  cent,  of  the 
total  number  of  foreign-born  men.  The  propor- 
tions vary  from  State  to  State.  Wherever  the  Irish 
or  Germans  are  numerous,  naturalizations  are  fre- 
quent. The  minimum  is  36.5  per  cent,  in  Ver- 
mont ;  the  maximum  is  75.9  per  cent,  in  Indiana.' 

'  Tenth  Census,  I.,  647.  The  white  foi'eign-born  male  adults  in 
the  States  were  2,984,041  ;  to  tliis  should  be  added  an  estimate  of 
71,959  adult  Chinamen  in  the  States.  The  minor  Chinese  popu- 
lation is  not  summarized  in  the  table. 

^  Eleventh  Census  Bulletin,  Nos.  175,202.  It  is  impossible  to  feel 
entire  confidence  in  these  figures.  The  first  question  of  the  enume- 
rator, after  ascertaining  that  a  man  was  foreign-born,  was  ;  "Are 
you  naturalized  ?  "  Tlie  tendency  to  answer  "  Yes  "  to  such  a  ques- 
tion, and  the  inconvenience  of  any  other  answer  for  a  man  who 
had  exercised  or  claimed  rights  reserved  for  citizens,  both  tend  to 
increase  the  "  natui^alized  "  column.  On  the  other  hand  there  is 
a  serious  variance  between  the  figures  for  Massachusetts  as  shown 
by  a  careful  State  census  of  18S5  (48.5  per  cent.)  and  the  United 
States  figures  of  1890,  which  show  only  46.1  per  cent,  for  1890. 
The  impression  in  the  State  has  been  that  naturalization  has  much 
increased.  Compare  Bulletin  No.  202,  pp.  19,  20,  with  Wadlin, 
Citizens  and  Aliens,  128. 


26  jEssa^a  on  (Bovernment. 

On  the  other  hand  several  races  are  indisposed  to 
seek  naturalization  :  the  107,000  Chinese  are  not 
permitted  to  become  citizens  ;  the  British  Ameri- 
cans, English,  Italians,  French  Canadians,  and  Por- 
tuguese naturalize  very  slowly  ;  probably  the  same 
might  be  said  of  the  Hungarians,  Poles,  and  Bohe- 
mians. Nevertheless  the  Massachusetts  proportion 
is  below  rather  than  above  the  average  ;  although 
the  fact  that  naturalization  is  necessary  before  a 
man  can  vote  should  stimulate  naturalization  in 
that  State.  If  the  proportion  of  naturalized  for- 
eigners in  1880  was  as  great  as  in  1890,  Ave  must 
add  1,787,000  to  the  list  of  voters.  In  addition  to 
this  million  and  three-quarters  of  persons  who,  in 
1880,  had  thus  shown  their  attachment  to  the  con- 
stitution, there  was  a  body  of  aliens  who,  by  the 
laws  of  the  State  in  which  they  resided,  were  en- 
titled to  vote  because  they  had  filed  their  declara- 
tion of  intention  to  become  citizens.  A  careful  es- 
timate puts  the  number  at  less  than  100,000.'  The 
former  exclusions  because  of  race  no  longer  prevail, 
except  that  Chinese  are  expressly  excluded  in  Ore- 
gon and  California ;  but  as  Chinamen  born  in  this 
country  are  insignificant  in  number,  the  exclusions 
necessitate  no  additional  deduction. 

'  The  white  foreign-born  adults  in  the  fifteen  States  allowing  the 
practice  were  874,834  in  number.  Of  these  about  511,000  have 
been  included  under  the  previous  allowance  for  naturalization. 
The  number  of  declarants  in  the  fifteen  States  in  1890,  was  123,  ■ 
774  ;  in  1880,  it  may  have  been  90,000. 


jEjcrclse  of  tbe  Suffrage.  27 

As  to  the  three  classes  of  legal  voters — native 
born,  naturalized,  and  declarants — the  relative  pro- 
portions vary  much  from  State  to  State.  None  of 
the  eastern  coast  States  admits  declarants  to  the 
suffrage  ;  but  the  proportion  of  foreigners  to  the 
whole  population  is  so  much  greater  in  these 
States,  and  especially  in  the  cities,  that  the  num- 
ber of  foreign  voters  is  often  alarming.  Only  a 
seventh  of  the  people  of  the  United  States  are  for- 
eign born  ;  but  of  the  men  of  voting  age  more  than 
one-fourth  are  foreigners  ;  and  as  long  ago  as  1875, 
sixty-five  per  cent,  of  the  adult  men  in  New  York 
City  were  foreign  born.  The  proportion  of  men  in 
middle  life  and  above  is  even  more  startling.  Of 
five  hundred  men  above  thirty-five  whom  the 
New  Yorker  meets  while  crossing  City  Hall  Park 
any  day,  four  hundred  are  certainly  foreigners 
born. 

Eleven  million  three  hundred  and  eighty-nine 
thousand  eight  hundred  and  ninety-one  persons 
w^xQ  prima  facie  entitled  to  the  suffrage  in  1880; 
but  out  of  this  number  large  deductions  must  be 
made  for  classes  of  persons  disqualified  by  various 
State  laws.  The  effect  of  these  exclusions  is  no- 
where summed  up,  but  it  may  be  inferred  from 
the  Massachusetts  census  of  1885,  in  which  some 
of  the  items  are  set  down  for  that  State,  and  from 
the  recent  bulletins  of  the  eleventh  census.  First 
come  disqualifications  based  on  property  or  nat- 
ural conditions.     There  were  4,129  adult  males  in 


28  j£0sa^0  on  (Boveinmeut. 

Massachusetts  in  1885  who  were  paupers.'  In 
many  States  there  is  no  legal  restriction  on  paupers 
votine ;  and  the  total  disfranchisement  for  this 
cause  cannot  exceed  60,000.  The  actual  posses- 
sion of  property  is  no  longer  a  condition  of  voting 
anywhere  in  the  Union.''  In  1880  it  still  affected 
foreign-born  persons  in  Rhode  Island,  and  may 
have  cut  off  5,000  votes.  A  tax  qualification  stood 
in  the  constitutional  laws  of  six  States  in  1880, 
and  may  have  prevented  50,000  votes.  It  now  ap- 
pears only  in  Delaware  and  Florida.  Throughout 
the  country  the  tendency  is  to  require  no  property 
qualification,  not  even  the  ability  to  support  one's 
self  or  to  live  without  appeal  to  public  charity. 

It  is  otherwise  with  the  moral  and  intellectual 
limitations  on  the  suffrage.  Prisoners  in  their 
cells  cannot  enjoy  the  educating  influence  of  the 
ballot  ;  and  there  were  at  least  60,000  such  in 
1880.''  State  constitutions  usually  disqualify  per- 
sons from  voting  if  they  have  committed  infamous 
crimes  ;  in  practice  the  restriction  has  very  little 
effect;  an  allowance  of  15,000  for  persons  whose 
votes  would  be  refused  from  this  cause  is  ample. 
Then  comes  the  considerable  class  of  insane.     The 

'  This  number  is  taken  from  a  calculation  made  for  this  essay 
under  direction  of  Mr.  Wadlin. 

^  Except  in  municipal  elections  in  Providence,  Rhode  Island. 

^  The  number  of  adult  prisoners  in  Massachusetts  in  1885  was 
2,950,  according  to  special  figures  furnished  by  Mr.  Wadlin.  Wit- 
nesses and  others  under  detention  would  increase  the  proportion. 


Eixrctse  of  tbc  Suffrage.  29 

number  of  adult  men  in  asylums  in  1880  was  prob- 
ably not  far  from  40,000/  besides  many  thousands 
of  defective  and  weak-minded  persons.  A  much 
more  important  mental  disqualification  unfortu- 
nately has  not  yet  been  widely  applied  ;  illiterate 
persons  were  in  1880  excluded  only  in  Massachu- 
setts and  Connecticut.  The  effect  was  to  debar 
from  the  suffrage  about  35,000  persons/  The 
clause  of  the  new  Mississippi  constitution,  requir- 
ing the  voter  to  be  able  "  to  read  the  State  consti- 
tution, or  to  give  a  reasonable  interpretation  of  it 
when  read  to  him,"  is  likely  to  be  a  model  for 
other  States,  and  thus  to  increase  this  kind  of  dis- 
franchisement. 

Another  legal  disqualification  is  brought  very 
effectively  into  operation  by  the  constant  move- 
ment of  population  in  the  United  States.  In 
order  to  vote,  a  man  must  have  resided  in  the 
State  for  a  period  varying  from  three  months  to 
two  years  ;  and  in  the  district  in  which  he  votes  a 
specified  number  of  days  or  weeks.  To  say  that 
one  voter  in  a  hundred  has  not  acquired  a  voting 
residence  in  the  district  where  he  lives  is  an  under- 
statement. An  allowance  of  1 10,000  will  not 
cover  the  number  who  thus  actually  lost  their  vote 
in  1880. 

'  Eleventh  Census,  Bulletin  No.  62. 

'  Wadlin  in  his  Citizens  and  Aliens,  p.  128,  shows  in  Massa- 
chusetts 26,212  "polls,  not  voters."  Of  these  22,000  may  be 
estinaated  as  excluded  by  the  education  clause. 


30  j£s0ags  on  ©orernmcnt. 

Making  these  deductions  for  unnaturalized  for- 
eigners, paupers,  criminals,  defective  persons,  and 
non-residents,  we  reach  a  safe  approximation  to 
the  number  of  actual  legal  voters  in  1880;  it  was 
11,055,000.  Deducting  9,210,920,  the  total  presi- 
dential vote  of  that  year,  and  we  have  about  1,830,- 
000  voters  unaccounted  for;  these  are  the  stay-at- 
homes,  and  they  are  about  one-sixth  of  all  the 
voters.  A  recent  writer  has  urged  that  the  ab- 
stentions ought  not  to  exceed  one-twentieth.  A 
very  brief  consideration  will  show  that  when  five- 
sixths  of  the  voters  come  to  the  polls,  no  compul- 
sory system  could  much  increase  the  number. 
There  are  few  churches,  clubs,  societies,  or  lodges 
in  the  country  which  have  an  attendance  of  five- 
sixths,  even  once  a  year ;  there  is  not  an  army  in 
the  field  which  can  put  five-sixths  of  its  men  in 
the  ranks  for  a  battle.  There  is  not  another  coun- 
try in  the  world  which  has  ever  exhibited  so  large 
a  proportion  of  actual  voters  as  the  United  States. 
Germany  is  a  very  intelligent  country — a  country 
where  the  roads  are  good,  changes  of  residence  are 
infrequent,  and  political  interest  is  high.  In  the 
German  election  of  1887  the  number  of  votes  cast 
was  but  77.5  per  cent,  of  the  number  of  voters,  a 
little  more  than  three-fourths. 

Yet  the  absence  of  one-sixth  is  a  serious  evil  if 
it  can  be  avoided  ;  there  are  many  reasons  for  it, 
but  want  of  interest  in  the  elections  is  one  of  the 
smallest  of  them,     Old  men  have  a  proverbial  dis- 


Bjerclee  ot  tbe  Suffrage.  3i 


like  of  showers,  cold  air,  confusion,  and  fatigue. 
There  were  in  1880  about  490,000  men  of  seventy 
years  and  upward,  of  whom  certainly  400,000  '  were 
voters;  the  number  of  those  who  actually  voted 
is  probably  balanced  by  younger  men  who  felt  the 
feebleness  of  age.  Next  comes  the  army  of  sick. 
If  the  disbursements  of  sick-benefit  companies  are 
evidence,  men  in  ordinary  health  average  one 
week's  sickness  a  year.  It  is  fair  to  deduct  two 
per  cent,  of  the  men  between  twenty-one  and 
seventy  on  this  ground.  Another  very  large  body 
is  made  up  of  those  away  from  home  on  election 
day ;  this  class  includes  travellers  for  pleasure, 
commercial  travellers,  students,  many  railroad  and 
steamship  employees,  sailors,  and  workmen  em- 
ployed at  a  distance  from  home.  Making  due  al- 
lowance for  the  non-naturalized  persons  among 
them,  a  deduction  of  two  per  cent.,  or  one  man  in 
fifty,  should  be  made.  A  chapter  of  pure  acci- 
dents accounts  for  about  one  per  cent,  more : 
sprained  ankles,  sudden  telegrams,  importunate 
callers,  defective  registration,  forgetfulness.  At 
least  one  man  in  a  hundred  who  means  in  the 
morning  to  vote  finds  that  the  polls  have  closed 
without  his  vote.  The  discrepancy  between  the 
registration  and  the  vote  in  States  like  New  York, 
in  which   re-registration   is  necessary  every   year, 

'  Wadlin,  p.  191,  shows  that  in  Massachusetts  in  1885  there 
were  about  25,000  voters  above  seventy,  out  of  a  population  of 
1,942,111. 


32  Bssavs  on  (Bovernment. 

roughly  measures  the  accidents  of  all  kinds :  the 
process  of  registration  is  vexatious ;  the  man  who 
undergoes  it  intends  to  vote,  at  least  in  presiden- 
tial years  ;  yet  the  difference  is  often  ten  per  cent. 

Another  fundamental  error  in  regard  to  absten- 
tion is  the  assumption  that  every  voter  who  wishes 
to  vote  has  the  opportunity.  In  1880  the  negroes 
of  voting  age  were  1,400,000;  in  almost  every 
State  in  which  they  were  numerous  the  ratio  of 
votes  cast  to  voters  was  lower  than  elsewhere.  In 
Mississippi,  having  almost  exactly  the  population 
of  New  Jersey,  and  almost  no  foreigners,  the  rate 
was  less  than  half  that  in  the  latter  State.  No  one 
believes  that  this  was  the  result  of  indifference. 
At  the  same  ratio  as  in  the  North  the  number  of 
votes  in  the  South  would  have  been  1,000,000 
greater.  It  is  not  extravagant  to  suppose  that 
560,000  more  votes  would  have  been  cast  if  there 
had  been  no  restraint  on  the  blacks.  Where  in- 
timidation is  not  employed  directly,  as  in  the 
South,  it  is  often  applied  indirectly  ;  nor  does 
even  the  Australian  ballot  entirely  protect  a  work- 
man from  a  conviction  that  not  to  vote  at  all  may 
be  the  safest  form  of  vote.  Indeed,  the  Austra- 
lian ballot  leads  to  one  of  the  most  dangerous  and 
subtle  forms  of  bribery — that  in  which  a  man  is 
paid  to  withhold  a  vote  he  would  naturally  have 
given. 

An  appreciable  number  of  votes  is  lost  through 
technical  objections  to  their  reception.     In   1884  a 


Bjercise  of  tbc  Siittiagc.  33 

young  lawyer  of  New  York  City,  on  offering  his 
vote,  found  that  by  the  error  of  the  registration 
officer  he  had  been  registered  in  the  wrong  pre- 
cinct. He  spent  the  rest  of  the  day  in  securing 
his  right  :  a  considerable  portion  was  passed  in 
ranging  the  city,  collecting  evidence  ;  another  por- 
tion in  finding  a  judge  who  would  issue  a  manda- 
mus. A  few  minutes  before  the  polls  closed  he 
voted  ;  but  where  he  succeeded  a  hundred  men 
must  have  failed.  The  ingenious  nine-ballot-box 
system  in  the  South  furnishes  an  easy  mode  of 
shutting  out  unwelcome  votes  ;  and  the  total  vote 
in  New  York  in  1891  was  diminished  by  rejecting 
ballots  that  had  a  turned  quad  upon  them,  or  a 
misprinted  endorsement. 

The  total  loss  of  votes  due  to  old  age,  illness, 
absence  from  home,  accident,  intimidation,  and 
miscounts  may  be  estimated  at  about  1,500,000. 
Deducting  this  number  from  the  1,800,000  pre- 
viously unaccounted  for,  and  we  have  left  about 
300,000  voters  who  might  have  been  expected  to 
vote,  but  felt  no  sufficient  interest.  This  is  about 
three  per  cent,  of  the  voters  and  a  little  more  than 
one-half  of  one  per  cent,  of  the  population. 

The  percentage  of  votes  cast  for  the  whole 
Union  is  considerably  exceeded  by  that  for  many 
of  the  separate  States  :  thus  New  York  in  1880 
reached  the  then  unprecedented  figure  of  1,104,- 
605  votes  —  nearly  twenty-two  per  cent,  of  the 
whole  population,  and  not  far  from  ninety-four  per 


34  Bssa^s  on  ©ovcrnment. 

cent,  of  the  voters.  Could  any  system  of  compul- 
sion produce  a  better  result  ?  One  of  the  current 
axioms  of  reform  in  politics  is  that  the  people  are 
losing  interest  in  the  elections.  All  propositions, 
lemmas,  and  corollaries  based  on  that  axiom  had 
better  be  revised  ;  for  the  truth  is  that  the  propor- 
tion of  voters  has  increased  pretty  steadily  for  a 
century,  and  that  the  proportion  of  votes  to  voters 
has  grown  ever  since  the  first  spirited  election  of 
1840.  Comparison  is  difficult,  because  the  negroes 
had  practically  no  share  in  the  elections  till  1868; 
and  the  influx  of  foreigners  has  increased  the  total 
population  faster  than  it  has  increased  the  voting 
strength,  so  that  the  proportion  of  possible  votes  to 
total  population  is  diminished.  In  the  election  of 
1 880  the  vote  reached  18.6  per  cent,  of  the  popula- 
tion ;  in  1888  it  was  about  19.2  per  cent.  ;  in  1892 
the  proportion  to  the  calculated  population  was 
about  18.9.  In  many  States  there  is  no  stay-at- 
home  vote  worth  considering. 

When  we  come  to  State  elections  the  difference 
is  painful  ;  even  when  simultaneous  with  the  na- 
tional voting  the  vote  is  a  little  less.  When  the 
two  do  not  come  together  the  State  vote  in  New 
York  is  about  three-fourths  as  large  as  the  na- 
tional. The  presidential  vote  of  1888  was  cut 
down  by  259,425  in  1891  ;  that  is,  out  of  ten  vot- 
ers who  were  out  at  the  first  election,  three  stayed 
at  home  in  the  second.  Municipal  elections,  if 
held  at  a  different  time  from  other  elections,  show 


B£crc(0c  of  the  Suffrage.  35 

a  difference  even  greater:  in  New  York  City,  in 
1888,  the  vote  was  about  18  per  cent,  of  the  popu- 
lation ;  in  1890,  a  local  election  chiefly,  11. 6  per 
cent.;  in  1891,  for  governor,  13.2  per  cent.;  in 
1892,  for  President,  about  17  per  cent. 

There  is,  however,  one  encouraging  feature  of 
State  and  local  elections  ;  interest  in  them  also  has 
slowly  increased.  In  colonial  times  the  suffrage 
was  so  restricted  that  a  vote  one-fourth  as  large  as 
would  now  be  cast  by  the  same  population  was 
phenomenal.  Thus  in  Massachusetts,  when  the 
long  struggle  over  a  new  constitution  culminated 
in  the  popular  vote  of  1780,  there  were  only  about 
15,000  votes  in  a  population  of  350,000,  or 
scarcely  four  per  cent.'  In  Connecticut,  out  of 
200,000  people  in  1775  there  were  4,325  votes,  a 
little  over  two  per  cent.'  Comparing  the  votes  in 
State  elections  in  Massachusetts  for  forty  years,  it 
is  evident  that  there  is  a  steady  increase.  In  1855 
the  gubernatorial  vote  reached  what  was  then  a 
flood  tide  of  11,9  percent,  of  the  whole  popula- 
tion ;  in  1890,  with  more  than  130,000  unnatural- 
ized foreigners  to  be  deducted  from  the  possible 
voters,  the  proportion  of  voters  to  population  was 
12.8  per  cent.     Both  Minnesota  and  Pennsylvania 

'  A.  H.  Bullock,  in  Proceedings  of  the  American  Antiquarian 
Society,  new  series,  I.,  2i6  ;  Dexter,  Estimates  of  Population, 
p.  8. 

^  Dexter,  Estimates,  p.  13  ;  Connecticut  Colonial  Records,  xiv,, 

4 ;  XV.,  413. 


36  Basalts  on  Government. 


in  1890  cast  the  heaviest  proportional  vote  for 
governor  in  their  history.  In  New  York  and  Bos- 
ton the  participation  in  municipal  elections  seems 
rather  larger  than  ten  or  twenty  years  ago.  Nev- 
ertheless there  were  about  96,000  wilful  absentees 
in  New  York  in  1891,  or  more  than  a  fourth  of 
the  voters,  and  about  20,000  in  Boston.  Why  are 
they  so  neglectful  ? 

One  answer  is  that  much  more  care  is  taken  to 
get  out  the  vote  in  presidential  campaigns.  Efforts 
are  made  to  arouse  enthusiasm  once  in  four 
years,  which  it  would  be  impossible  to  make 
every  year.  The  simple  truth  is  that  the  voter  is 
not  interested  so  much  in  what  affects  his  welfare 
as  in  what  excites  his  imagination  ;  he  overcomes 
obstacles  and  sacrifices  convenience  and  private 
interest  when  he  thinks  the  object  is  of  great  im- 
portance;  and  he  has  his  own  standards  of  impor- 
tance. Whenever  the  voter,  while  caring  for  a 
good  president,  really  cares  more  for  a  good  mayor 
and  a  good  governor  and  a  good  legislature  for  the 
commonwealth,  he  will  vote  more  readily.  It  is 
true  that  the  national  election  is  a  simpler  affair, 
and  presents  fewer  complicated  issues  ;  that  un- 
known and  corrupt  men  are  less  likely  to  be  op- 
posed to  each  other,  leaving  to  the  voter  but  a 
choice  of  evils.  Nevertheless,  when  the  people 
see  a  great  principle  at  stake  in  a  State  election, 
the  vote  is  about  as  large  as  in  presidential  years. 
Such  was  the  case  in  Pennsylvania  in  1890. 


Bjercfee  of  tbc  Suffrage.  37 

That  abstention  is  a  very  serious  evil,  except  in 
presidential  years,  is  not  to  be  denied  ;  that  com- 
pulsion will  remedy  the  evil  is  not  so  clear.  The 
argument  against  the  power  of  the  State  to  com- 
pel the  deposit  of  votes  is  best  summed  up  in  Fal- 
staff's  declaration  :  "  If  reasons  were  as  plenty  as 
blackberries,  I  would  give  no  man  a  reason  upon 
compulsion."  Falstaff  recognizes  the  right  of  the 
State  to  restrain  and  to  forbid — "the  lion  will  not 
touch  the  true  prince  " — but  objects  to  inandanms 
government.  There  are,  in  the  United  States, 
surprisingly  few  things  which  a  man  must  do. 
The  usual  principle  of  law  is  negative  ;  if  a  man 
fail  to  observe  prescribed  legal  forms,  his  action 
binds  nobody.  No  man  is  obliged  to  make  his 
will,  however  great  the  advantage  to  the  State 
from  his  making  it ;  but  if  he  make  it  without 
two  witnesses,  it  is  no  will.  No  man  need  register 
before  an  election,  but  in  New  York  he  cannot 
vote  without  that  preliminary.  The  most  impor- 
tant case  of  compulsion  is  the  collection  of  taxes  ; 
and  the  experience  of  the  world  is  that  the  more 
strictly  taxes  are  laid  on  tangible  things  and  the 
less  they  fall  on  mere  paper  evidences  of  posses- 
sion, the  more  successful  is  the  tax-gatherer.  The 
State  has  a  right  to  tax  a  man  simply  because  he 
has  a  poll,  and  to  use  compulsory  means  of  collect- 
ing such  individual  taxes  ;  but  to  require  him  to 
use  the  brain  within  the  poll,  is  hardly  within  the 
scheme    of    government.     Another  forced  public 


43906'?' 


3^  JEssags  on  Goveinment. 

duty  is  military  service.  Every  able-bodied  male 
citizen  is  liable  to  militia  duty  in  his  State,  and 
liable  to  be  called  into  the  service  of  the  United 
States  in  case  of  war ;  but,  except  in  one  great 
crisis,  the  nation  has  depended  chiefly  on  volun- 
teers ;  and  even  the  "  universal  military  service  " 
of  Germany  does  not  mean  that  all  the  able- 
bodied  men  in  the  empire  are  required  to  turn 
out  once  a  year.  The  acceptance  of  public  office 
is  in  some  States  obligatory,  as  it  very  frequently 
was  in  the  Colonies.  As  yet,  however,  no  State 
has  accepted  the  old  Greek  system  of  the  Choregos, 
compelling  a  rich  man  to  fill  an  office  requiring 
large  expenditures  out  of  his  private  means ;  and 
few  States  longer  insist  on  compulsory  public  ser- 
vice of  any  kind.  We  should  hardly  enjoy  a  sys- 
tem like  that  of  the  old  university  government  of 
Oxford,  in  which  the  unfortunate  "  regent  mas- 
ters" could  be  haled  into  convocation,  in  order  to 
make  a  quorum.  Service  in  the  posse  coniitatiis 
when  called  upon  is  closely  akin  to  militia  duty. 
The  nearest  parallel  to  obligatory  voting  is  ob- 
ligatory jury  duty :  lawyers  know  how  far  the 
obligation  is  effective,  and  how  far  it  secures  good 
juries.  Here  again,  as  in  military  service,  the 
principle  is  not  of  universal  duty,  but  of  selection 
from  among  those  liable.  Compulsory  education 
would  seem  at  first  sight  to  have  a  very  close  re- 
semblance to  compulsory  voting ;  but  the  obliga- 
tion on  the  parent  in  this  case  is  much  more  akin 


Bjercise  of  tbe  Suffrage.  39 

to  that  of  clothing  and  supporting  children,  which 
ceases  when  children  become  old  enough  to  do 
their  own  thinking. 

The  limitation  of  enforced  services  to  the  brief 
category  enumerated  shows  the  practice  of  the 
country.  Law,  custom,  and  common  sense  agree 
that  any  requirement  shall  not  extend  from  acts  to 
opinions.  "  I  can  make  a  nigger  work,"  said  a 
master  to  Olmsted,  "  but  I  can't  make  him  think." 
The  same  principle  applies  still  more  strongly  to 
free  men.  Voting  is  simply  an  expression  of  pref- 
erence. We  have  in  our  country  the  same  kind 
of  an  interest,  though  vastly  greater  in  its  range, 
that  stockholders  have  in  a  corporation.  Haphaz- 
ard votes  have  less  value,  because  they  represent 
less  thought  or  less  conviction.  It  has  become 
customary  to  look  on  the  ballot  as  a  sort  of  talis- 
man, which  somehow  endows  the  possessor  with 
wisdom.  It  does  raise  a  voter  if  he  thinks  about 
his  vote  ;  but  the  education  consists  in  calling  out 
his  self-reliance,  not  in  training  him  to  a  disagree- 
able duty.  It  would  be  much  more  reasonable  to 
require  all  aliens  to  file  a  declaration  of  intention 
to  become  citizens  on  the  ground  that  the  purpose 
must  educate  them.  Compulsory  voting  seems  to 
rest  upon  much  the  same  principle  as  the  compul- 
sory attendance  of  mature  young  men  in  a  college 
chapel  ;  they  are  supposed  by  constant  practice  of 
religious  observances  to  acquire  a  habit  of  think- 
ing on    religious  subjects,  which  will  strengthen 


40  JEssags  on  Government. 


their  characters.  It  does  not  work  that  way  ;  nor 
can  you  by  law  compel  a  man  once  or  twice  a  year 
to  form  an  intelligent  opinion  on  public  questions. 
There  is  too  much  "mollycoddling"  of  voters 
already, — too  many  attempts  to  protect  them  from 
their  own  want  of  reflection.  The  people  of  the 
great  cities  would  govern  themselves  better  if  no- 
body had  power  to  step  in  to  save  them  from 
themselves. 

Beyond  the  question  whether  the  danger  is  se- 
rious and  the  question  whether  compulsion  is  de- 
sirable, comes  the  question  whether  any  effective 
compulsion  can  be  devised.  No  one  suggests  that 
the  delinquent  voter  shall  be  brought  by  main 
force  to  the  polls,  like  the  boys  at  Dotheboys 
Hall  to  their  brimstone  and  treacle.  The  so-called 
"compulsory  voting"  means,  of  course,  only  the 
providing  of  disagreeable  consequences  if  a  man 
fail  to  vote.  The  favorite  penalty  suggested  is  a 
money  fine.  This  is  not  a  new  idea  :  instances  in 
colonial  history  are  not  infrequent ;  the  penalty 
ranged  from  sixpence  to  two  hundred  pounds  of 
tobacco.  The  records  of  Southampton,  Long 
Island,  contain  the  following  account  of  a  political 
gathering  of  the  time  : 


lune  3,  1654.     At  a  general  court.     .     .     . 

At  the  said  court  there  being  a  great  disorder 
by  reason  of  ye  departure  of  some  of  the  members 
thereof  before  the  adiournment  or  dissolution  of 
the  saide  cort,  the  major  part  of  the  Cort  being  left, 


jEjerclse  of  tbe  Suffrage.  4i 

and  troubled  at  the  said  disorderly  carriage,  espe- 
cially considering  that  the  said  departure  was  be- 
fore the  full  consuination  of  what  was  then  agi- 
tated and  acted,  the  said  major  part  left  determine 
ye  cort  shall  be  called,  and  all  absent  that  de- 
parted as  aforesaid  shall  pay  according  to  former 
orders,  and  that  Thomas  Ilalsey  shall  pay  more- 
over 5s.  for  his  contemptious  carriage  vnto  ye  cort 
at  his  departure.' 

A  similar  vote  of  the  town  of  Lancaster,  Massa- 
chusetts, of  1669,  reads  as  follows  :  "  Eurie  settled 
inhabitant  atend  the  publique  meeting  of  the  town 
eurie  yeare  the  first  Monday  in  februarie  by  10  of 
the  cloke,"  on  penalty  of  two  shillings.  The 
Maryland  statute  of  1716  has  a  stringent  rule  as 
follows : 


All  freeholders,  freemen  and  other  persons  qual- 
ified to  give  votes  in  the  election  of  delegates  shall 
and  are  hereby  obliged  to  be  and  appear  at  the 
time  and  place  appointed  for  elections  to  be  here- 
after had  or  made  of  any  delegates,  burgesses  and 
citizens  to  serve  in  any  Assembly  for  this  Prov- 
ince, under  the  penalty  of  one  hundred  pounds  of 
tobacco  for  every  person  so  qualified  as  aforesaid, 
neglecting  to  appear  [half  to  go  to  the  informer  in 
the  county  court]." 

'  Records  of  Southampton,  102. 

'  Bacon's  Laws,  1765  (no  paging).  For  this  and  the  otlier  colo- 
nial statutes  I  am  indebted  to  the  unpublished  researches  of  Mr. 
David  E.  Spencer  on  colonial  suffrage. 


42  Eseags  on  (Boveinment. 

A  Plymouth  statute  of  1660  enjoined  voting  in 
the  following  terms : 

Whereas  the  court  hath  taken  notice  that  divers 
of  the  ffreemen  of  this  corporation  doe  neither  ap- 
peer  att  courts  of  election  nor  send  theire  voates 
by  proxey  for  the  choise  of  majestrates  &c  It  is 
enacted  by  the  court  and  the  authoritie  therof; 
that  whosoever  of  the  ffreemen  of  this  corporation  ; 
that  shall  not  appeer  att  the  court  of  election  att 
Plymouth  in  June  anually  nor  send  theire  voate 
by  proxey  according  to  order  of  court  for  the  choise 
of  Gou''  Assistants  Commissioners  and  Treasurer 
shalbee  fined  to  the  collonies  vse  the  sume  of  ten 
shillings  for  every  such  default ;  vnlesse  some  un- 
avoidable impediments  hinder  such  in  theire  ap- 
peerance.' 

Massachusetts  appeared  to  expect  but  did  not 
require  voting.^  The  Georgia  constitution  of  1777 
provided  that 

every  person  absenting  himself  from  an  election, 
and  shall  neglect  to  give  in  his  or  their  ballots 
at  such  election,  shall  be  subject  to  a  penalty  not 
exceeding  five  pounds  ;  the  mode  of  recovery,  and 
also  the  appropriation  thereof,  to  be  pointed  out 
and  directed  by  act  of  legislature :  Provided^  nev- 
ertheless, that  a  reasonable  excuse  shall  be  ad- 
mitted.' 

'Plymouth  Colony  Records,  XI.,  84,  127,  157. 

''■  Massachusetts  Colonial   Records,  I.,  166,  185,  277. 

^  Poore's  Charters  and  Constitutions,  I.,  379. 


;6ici-ci6e  of  tbe  Suftrage.  43 

But  the  earliest  and  latest  laws  on  this  subject 
were  passed  in  Virginia.  Eight  different  acts  ap- 
pear.    The  first  was  in  1646,  as  follows: 

That  what  freemen  soever,  haveing  lawful  sumons 
of  the  time  and  place  for  election  of  Burgesses,  that 
shall  not  make  repaire  accordingly,  Such  person  or 
persons  vnles  there  be  lawful  1  cause  for  the  absent- 
ing himselfe  shall  forfeit  lOO  lb.  of  tob'o  for  his 
non  appearance,  *  *  -k-  *  the  said  fine  to  be 
levyed  by  distresse  in  case  of  refusalL' 

In  1705  it  was  enacted 

that  after  publication  of  writs  and  time  and  place 
of  election  of  burgesses  as  aforesaid,  every  free- 
holder, actually  resident  within  the  county  where 
the  election  is  to  be  made,  respectively  shall  appear 
accordingly,  and  give  his  vote  at  such  election, 
upon  penalty  of  forfeiting  two  hundred  pounds  of 
tobacco  to  such  person  or  persons  as  will  inform 
and  sue  for  the  same  :  To  be  recovered,  with  costs, 
in  any  court  of  record  within  their  dominion,  by 
information,  bill,  plaint,  or  action  of  debt,  wherein 
no  essoin,  protection,  or  wager  of  law,  privilege,  or 
any  more  than  one  imparlance  will  be  allowed.* 

The  last  acts  of  the  kind  appear  to  be  the  Vir- 
ginia statutes  of  1785  and  1788.  The  latter  merely 
applies  the  principle  of  the  former  to  elections  for 

'  Hening,  I.,  334.     The  act  of  1662  is  similar.    Ibid.,  II.,  82. 
'  Hening,   III.,  238  ;  substantially  repeated  in  1762  and  1769. 
Jbid.,  VII.,  521  ;  VIII.,  308. 


44  Bssa^s  on  ©overnnicnt. 

members  of  Congress.'     The  former  provides  an 
elaborate  system  of  compulsion. 

Any  elector  qualified  according  to  this  act,  fail- 
ing to  attend  any  annual  election  of  delegates  or 
of  a  senator,  and,  if  a  poll  be  taken,  to  give  or 
offer  to  give  his  vote,  shall  pay  one-fourth  of  his 
portion  of  all  such  levies  and  taxes  as  shall  be 
assessed  and  levied  in  his  county  the  ensuing  year  : 
And  for  discovering  such  defaulters,  the  sheriff  or 
other  officer  taking  the  poll,  shall  within  ten  days 
after  the  said  election,  deliver  to  the  clerk  of  the 
county  or  corporation  court,  as  the  case  may  be,  a 
copy  of  the  poll  by  him  taken,  to  be  kept  in  his 
office,  who  shall  suffer  any  candidate  or  elector  to 
take  a  copy  thereof,  and  the  said  clerk  is  hereby 
directed  to  cause  a  copy  of  the  same  to  be  deliv- 
ered to  the  next  grand-jury,  to  be  sworn  for  the 
county  or  corporation,  who  shall  be  charged  by  the 
presiding  magistrate  to  make  presentments  of  all 
such  persons  qualified  to  vote  residing  in  the  said 
county  or  corporation,  who  shall  have  failed  to 
have  given  their  votes  at  the  said  election  agree- 
able to  law.^ 

These  precedents  are  of  little  value  to  us  ;  with 
few  exceptions,  they  apply  to  attendance  at  a  delib- 
erative meeting,  where  opinions  were  to  be  openly 
expressed  and  controverted  ;  where  a  man's  argu- 
ment was  as  much  desired  as  his  vote.  The  re- 
quirement to  vote  for  representatives  appears  to 

'  Hening,  XII.,  65. 

^  Hening,  XII.,  122.  Cf.  Jefferson's  report  of  the  Committee  of 
Revision  (1784),  p.  i. 


Bjercisc  of  tbc  Suffrage.  45 


have  been  applied  only  in  Plymouth,  Maryland, 
Georgia,  and  Virginia.  The  number  of  persons 
affected  was  very  small.  The  most  crowded  town 
meetine  ever  held  in  Boston  before  the  Revolu- 
tion  was  that  which  assembled  in  1734  to  consider 
Peter  Fancuil's  offer  of  a  market-house ;  the  votes 
cast  were  916,  out  of  a  population  of  15,000;'  in 
1888  the  vote  of  the  Seventeenth  Ward  in  Boston, 
having  a  population  of  15,000,  was  nearly  3,000. 
Yet  the  experience  of  the  colonies  in  compelling 
their  few  voters,  does  not  seem  so  happy  as  to  en- 
courage the  application  of  the  system  to  our  more 
difificult  conditions.  All  these  restrictions  have 
long  been  abandoned.  A  money  fine  is  not  the 
most  successful  means  of  holding  the  community 
up  to  its  duties  ;  people  get  into  a  reckless  feeling 
that  it  is  right  to  do  the  thing  prohibited,  if  one 
stands  ready  to  pay  the  fine.  The  Beekman, 
Chilton,  Massachusetts,'  and  Hawes  bills  seek  to 
remedy  lack  of  interest  in  voting  by  a  system 
which  must  fail  for  lack  of  interest  in  prosecutions. 
It  is  idle  to  expect  that  the  coinmunity  which  will 
not  vote  will  punish  men  for  not  voting.  The  sys- 
tem of  fines  works  well  when  applied  to  minor  but 
positive  offences  ;  even  the  Lombards,  who  carried 
out  the  principle  to  many  fanciful  details,  kept 
fines  for  deeds  of  commission.     If  a  man  maimed 

'  Boston  Town  records. 

'•^  The  text  of  these  three  is  given  by  Holls,  41-43. 


46  jBse^'ss  on  Government. 


another,  he  paid  "  for  the  little  finger  iv  solidi ; 
for  the  middle  finger  ii  solidi ;  for  the  thumb  viii 
solidi";  there  was  no  fine  for  failing  to  shout 
and  clash  the  shield  at  the  election  of  a  king.  The 
state  has  a  right  to  require  of  the  citizen  any  serv- 
ice necessary  to  national  preservation ;  but  the 
state  is  equally  bound  not  to  turn  the  individual 
into  a  machine. 

A  second  and  very  ingenious  penalty  has  been 
put  into  operation  in  Illinois.  The  names  of  per- 
sons who  fail  to  vote  are  put  on  the  jury  lists. 
Apparently  nothing  could  be  more  automatic  and 
effective.  The  man  who  shirks  the  unpleasant 
duty  of  spending  an  hour  in  casting  his  ballot  be- 
fore a  public  officer,  may  spend  six  weeks  in  decid- 
ing whether  that  officer  does  his  duty.  However 
disagreeable  this  might  be  for  the  voter,  it  is  un- 
fortunately even  more  disagreeable  for  litigants 
and  counsel.  The  system  involves  the  deliberate 
selection  of  men  who  neglect  one  duty,  to  perform 
a  more  important  duty.  It  obliges  men  who  are 
too  feeble  and  sick  to  vote  to  show  cause  why 
they  should  not  inhabit  a  jury  room.  Further- 
more, it  furnishes  an  easy  path  for  those  who  prefer 
jury  duty  to  more  serious  tasks.  A  professional 
"  heeler  "  has  his  disadvantages ;  but  a  professional 
juryman  is  a  worse  evil.  Possibly  it  might  be  a 
suitable  punishment  for  a  man  who  refused  to  ac- 
cept jury  duty,  to  make  him  vote  a  straight  ticket 
at  the  next  election;  but  jury  duty  is  not  a  suit- 


Bjerclsc  ot  tbc  Sutfrage.  47 

able  reward  or  a  suitable  punishment  for  the  delin- 
quent voter. 

A  third  suggestion  for  sharpening  the  conscience 
of  the  voter  adopts  the  principle  of  the  Mosaic  law  : 
"  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die."  The  voter 
who  once  omits  to  vote  shall  not  be  allowed  to 
vote  thereafter,  until  he  shall  have  purged  himself 
by  paying  a  fine.  The  proposition  has  been  ably 
set  forth  by  Mr.  Holls,  who  supports  it  with  great 
ingenuity  of  argument.  It  is  undoubtedly  a  better 
system  than  that  of  fines  or  jury  duty;  it  attaches 
a  disagreeable,  and  perhaps  a  permanent  stigma  to 
the  neglect.  But  as  a  means  of  getting  out  a 
larger  proportion  of  the  voters,  or  increasing  inter- 
est in  public  affairs,  its  efficacy  may  be  doubted. 
Perhaps  the  best  way  to  discuss  it  will  be  to  ana- 
lyze the  reasons  for  the  stay-at-home  vote,  and  to 
see  how  far  each  class  of  delinquents  would  be 
diminished  by  the  measure. 

Bad  weather  keeps  many  thousands  of  voters  at 
home ;  compulsory  voting  would  amerce  or  dis- 
qualify thousands  of  men  who  are  kept  away  by  bad 
roads,  or  by  the  rising  of  the  Southern  streams, 
along  the  beds  of  which  highways  are  often  con- 
structed. The  voter  who  has  a  cold,  or  who  just- 
ly fears  a  cold,  or  whose  wife  justly  or  unjustly 
fears  it,  will  be  debarred.  It  is  doubtful  whether 
fear  of  disfranchisement  or  fine  would  greatly 
diminish  any  of  the  bad-weather  classes. 

Another  group  is  made  up  of  those  who  will  not 


4S  Essags  on  ©ovecnmcnt. 

mix  in  "dirty  politics";  who  think  all  parties 
"packs  of  scoundrels,"  and  who  wish  to  be  left  to 
their  comfortable  private  life.  These  men  are  the 
stock  illustrations  of  what  may  be  called  the  Sun- 
day-school literature  of  the  subject  —  the  awful 
examples  held  up  to  the  young  man  who  intends 
to  go  fishing  on  election  day.  That  such  persons 
constitute  one  in  a  hundred  of  the  voters  is  hard  to 
believe.  They  certainly  cannot  exceed  three  in  a 
hundred,  since  that  is  the  total  number  of  wilful 
abstainers  in  Presidential  elections.  If  disfran- 
chised for  not  voting,  how  many  additional  votes 
will  be  got,  and  how  many  dollars  for  the  public 
treasury  ? 

Much  larger  numbers  neglect-  to  vote  because 
they  know  their  party  to  be  in  a  hopeless  minority, 
and  that  their  votes  can  make  no  possible  differ- 
ence. One  would  expect  to  find  many  thousands 
of  such  men  in  the  absolutely  sure  States,  such 
as  Texas  and  Vermont,  the  vote  of  which  has 
for  many  years  not  been  in  doubt.  The  Demo- 
cratic majority  in  Texas  is  over  100,000  ;  but  the 
minority  keeps  up  a  State  organization  ;  and  the 
vote  of  the  State  is  little  smaller  in  proportion  to 
the  population  than  that  of  Virginia.  All  the 
Southern  States  have  a  small  proportional  vote ; 
the  congressional  vote  of  Tennessee  is  about  half 
of  that  Iowa,  which  has  about  an  equal  population 
and  similar  industries.  In  Vermont,  which  has 
never  gone  anything  but  Republican  since  there 


jBiccxciee  of  tbc  Suffrage.  49 


was  a  Republican  party,  the  majority  takes  pride 
in  displaying  its  own  size.  The  stay-at-homes 
are  about  as  numerous  in  close  as  in  sure  States, 
particularly  if  the  opinion  gets  abroad  that  one 
party  is  reasonably  sure  to  win.  Since  party 
managers  aim  to  "  poll  the  full  strength  of  the 
party"  they  would  probably  favor  some  measure 
of  compulsion.  Here  comes  in  one  of  the  serious 
dangers  of  the  disfranchisement-fine  system.  The 
absolutely  indifferent  voter  will  lose  the  vote 
which  he  never  uses  ;  the  careless  but  honest  voter 
will  lose  the  vote  which  he  would  have  used 
sometimes ;  and  the  careless  and  dishonest  voter 
will  have  his  fines  paid  for  him,  and  he  will  vote, 
and  he  will  vote  "straight."  Massachusetts  found 
the  state  of  things  so  demoralizing  that  in  1891 
the  poll-tax  requirement  was  struck  out  of  the  con- 
stitution :  a  State  which  adopts  the  proposed  sys- 
tem will  eventually  abandon  it  for  a  similar  reason. 

One  large  class  of  abstainers  would  probably  be 
reduced  by  such  a  law  ;  it  is  the  men  who  are 
public-spirited  and  who  know  that  they  ought  to 
vote,  but  who  are  too  busy,  and  who  think  that 
their  duty  will  be  performed  by  some  one  else.  If 
such  men  voted  without  much  regard  for  party 
when  they  did  go  to  the  polls,  they  might  fre- 
quently change  elections  ;  in  fact,  however,  their 
number  would  probably  only  swell  the  total  vote 
on  both  sides  without  much  altering  results. 

In   the  few  States  in  which  registration  is  re- 
4 


so  Essai?B  on  Government. 


newed  by  the  voter  every  year,  men  sometimes 
abstain  from  registering  to  escape  jury  duty;  for 
the  jury  lists  are  often  made  up  from  the  register. 
This  number  is  said  to  be  considerable  in  New 
York  City.  Fines,  if  applied,  might  perhaps  bring 
out  their  vote ;  a  different  system  of  selecting 
candidates  might  have  the  same  result. 

Next  comes  the  class,  unhappily  too  large,  of 
those  who  neither  know  nor  care  anything  about 
the  election,  the  candidates,  or  the  result,  but  who 
do  care  to  sell  their  votes.  The  hope  of  the  re- 
formers seems  to  be  that  such  men  will  get  so 
deeply  in  arrears  of  fines  that  they  will  disappear 
out  of  politics  from  sheer  inability  to  pay  their 
way  back  to  the  suffrage.  Is  it  likely  that  a  man 
who  looks  on  his  vote  as  a  piece  of  personal  prop- 
erty will  forfeit  it  by  neglect  ?  Or  if  he  does,  is 
it  likely  that  where  there  is  money  to  pay  for 
his  vote  there  may  not  also  be  money  to  pay  his 
fines  ?  The  black  spectre  which  affects  all  ques- 
tions of  politics  in  the  South  comes  in  here  also. 
Nobody  who  understands  the  condition  of  the 
negro  can  wish  that  he  be  incited  to  vote  where 
he  voluntarily  refrains.  But  the  negro  usually 
votes  if  he  can  ;  to  prevent  him  from  voting  and 
then  to  disfranchise  him  because  he  does  not  vote, 
is  not  likely  to  improve  the  relations  of  the  races. 
The  proposed  scheme  must  have  the  effect,  North 
and  South,  of  putting  a  pressure  to  vote  upon  the 
most  ignorant  and  debased. 


jBjerctse  of  tbe  Suffrage.  5i 


This  brings  us  to  the  last  and  most  important 
class  of  absentees,  those  who  deliberately  withhold 
their  votes  because  they  think  that  they  can  exert 
more  influence  on  public  affairs  in  that  way  than 
by  casting  them.     The  great  evil  of  the  whole  suf- 
frage system   is  not  that  votes  are  few,  but   that 
they  are    unconsidered.      If   a   commission    Avent 
from  house  to  house  to  get  votes,  so  that  there 
were  no  trouble  to  the  voters,  nineteen  men  out  of 
every  twenty  would  vote  their  usual  party  ticket. 
Any  unusual  defection  of  voters  means  a  deliber- 
ate lesson   to  party  managers.     A  similar  lesson 
might  be  taught  by  voting  for  some   third-party 
candidate,  or  by  voting  for  a  good  candidate  on 
the  other  ticket.     As  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  not 
in   the  United  States  one  voter  in  fifty  who  will 
do  either  under  any  circumstances.     Neither  party 
feels  more  confidence  in  the  nominating  apparatus 
of  the  other  side  than  in  its  own.    American  voters 
rarely  pass  from   one  party  to  another  ;  they  de- 
pend on  the  silent  but  effectual  protest  of  leaving 
their  party  in  the  lurch.     The  absentee  vote  of 
the  opposite  party  permitted  the  election  of  Gov- 
ernor Cleveland   in   New   York   in    1882,  and  of 
Governor  Pattison  in  Pennsylvania  in   1890,  and 
gave  the  Democrats  a  majority  in  the  Congres- 
sional election  of  1890.     To  compel  men  to  vote 
against  their  will  is  to  tighten  the  control  of  party 
managers.     The  defect  of  the  compulsory  system, 
as  of  many  proposed  reforms  which  are  expected 


52  Bssa^s  on  Government. 

to  restore  the  Eden  period  of  politics,  is  that  it 
does  not  go  to  the  root  of  the  matter.  It  will  be 
noticed  in  Table  I.  that  the  percentage  of  votes  to 
voters  is  about  four  and  a  half  per  cent,  less  in 
1892  than  in  1800.  Comparison  with  the  votes 
of  1884  and  1888  suggests  no  steady  deterioration  ; 
it  is  probable  that  many  voters  abstained  because 
they  were  willing  to  vote  neither  their  usual  ticket 
nor  for  the  opposite  party. 

Honest  voters  are  indifferent  or  refuse  to  vote 
because  they  feel  their  impotence  to  affect  their 
own  party  management  ;  yet  they  support  their 
party  management  because  experience  shows  that 
the  men  who  fight  it  must  make  great  exertions 
and  sacrifices,  or  be  set  out  of  politics  ;  and  further 
because  permanent  political  results  can  be  brought 
about  only  through  strong  and  persisting  parties. 
Compulsory  voting  supplies  no  new  motives,  and 
would  not  alter  those  political  habits  of  the  Ameri- 
can people  which  are  the  real  evil.  Compulsory 
voting  cannot  create  interest  in  local  affairs,  or 
break  up  the  practice  of  adhesion  to  unfit  leaders. 

Is  there  not  already  a  sufficient  remedy  for  the 
stay-at-home  vote  ?  The  man  who  is  absent  from 
elections  is  still  a  voter,  a  resident,  a  man  :  he  has 
important  interests.  If  appeals  to  patriotism,  love 
of  order  and  decency  be  not  sufficient,  let  the  voter 
suffer  in  the  manner  suggested  by  the  quaint  reso- 
lution of  Lancaster,  Massachusetts,  in  1669.  In 
addition    to  a  nominal   fine  the  neglectful  voters 


I2£crciae  of  tbc  Suffrage.  53 

were  to  lose  "  their  voate  in  such  transactions  of 
the  town,  that  may  be  acted  by  the  town  in  their 
absence."  Amplifying  the  principle  of  self-inter- 
est, the  true  remedy  may  be  formulated  thus  : 

A    BILL 

to  provide  a  suitable  punishment  for  the  failure  to 

vote. 

Be  it  enacted,  etc. 

Section  i.  On  and  after  the  passage  of  this  act, 
it  shall  be  the  duty  of  every  person  duly  qualified, 
to  vote  at  every  election,  national,  state  or  muni- 
cipal. 

Section  2.  If  any  person  shall  neglect  the  said 
duty  he  shall  be  disqualified  from  voting  at  the 
election  at  which  the  neglect  occurred,  and  no 
longer. 

Section  3.  Any  qualified  voter  who  fails  to  vote 
at  any  lawful  election  shall  nevertheless  be  bound 
by  the  result  of  said  election  as  though  he  had 
participated  therein  ;  and  all  persons  chosen  to 
office  at  such  election  shall  exercise  the  duties  of 
their  of^ce  as  though  he  had  voted  ;  and  all  stat- 
utes passed  by  persons  so  elected,  acting  as  a  law- 
ful legislature,  shall  be  binding  upon  him. 

If  it  be  objected  that  this  is  simply  a  statement 
of  the  present  practice,  the  writer  makes  no  reply. 


54 


jEssags  on  Government. 


Table   I.— LEGAL   VOTERS   COMPARED 


Total  population 

Males  above  21 

Per  cent,  to  total  population 

Native  born 

Foreign  born 

Per  cent,  of  foreign  born  to  total  adult 

males 

Foreigners  naturalized 

Foreigners  not  naturalized 

Per  cent,  of  foreign  naturalized   to 
foreign  born 


Massachusetts. 


Boston 
1885. 


State. 
1885. 


3901393  i-942,iii 

"7,713,    572,726 

29.9  29.5 

66,761!    366,499 

50,556     206,227 


43-4 
28,841 

21,715 
S7-0 


Total  "  votables  "  (having  age  and  sex).  117,713 


Native  men 

Native  women  in  Wyoming 

Naturalized  foreigners 

Foreigners  declarants  and  voters 
Foreigners  not  voters 


Total  normal  voters 

Exclusions   

Paupers  (not  polled) 

Prisoners 

Criminals 

Insane 

Residence  not  secured  (1  per  cent.) 

Taxes  not   paid 

Illiterate  (or  "  not  voters  ") 


Total  legal  voters 

Per  cent,  to  population  of  States. 
Per  cent,  to  adult  males 


Total  votes   

Per  cent,  to  population. . 
Per  cent,  to  legal  voters. 


66.761 
28,841 
21,715 


State. 
1890. 


2,238,943 

665,009 

29.7 

407,915 

257,094 


36.0  38.6 

98,730]  112,504 

117,096  144,590 

48.5  43-3 


572,726  665,009 
366,499  407,915 


New 


95.602 
17,780 

469 

1,246 

500 

268 

*g,ooo 

1,000 

5,297 


98,730  112,504 

8,366|   6.541 

99.131!  139.049 


465,299,  520,319 

84,175 

4.767 

2,950 

1,000 

1,246 

*45.ooo 

1,000 

26,212 


77,822  381,124 


19.9 

66.6' 


19.6 
66.5 


44,714:  209,668 
11.4  10.9 
57-5!    55-0 


285,520 
12.7 


City. 

State. 

1880. 

1880. 

1,206,209 

5,082,871 

336,137 

1,408,751 

27.9 

29.7 

872,153 

536,598 

38.1 

♦325,700 

336,137 


'2ro,t 


*6o.7 


1,408,751 
87«.i53 

♦325,700 


1,248 


*i,  197.853 

5. 894 
6,639 


1,708     8,230 
♦11,978 


♦1,165,000 


205,3761  1,104,605 

17.0'     21.7! 

♦94-0 


JB^ctcise  of  tbe  Suffiacic. 


55 


WITH   THE    POPULATION. 


1 

YOKK. 

New  England. 

United 

States. 

The  States. 

State. 

1890. 

1880. 

1890. 

1880. 

1890. 

1880. 

1890. 

S.997.853  1 
1,769,649 

4,010,527 
1,144,919 

4,700.79s  ] 
1,410,191 

50,153,783 
12,830,349 

62,622,250 
16,940,311 

49.371.340 
12,568,891 

61,908,906 
16.733,527 

29-5 

1,084,187 

685,462 

25.6 

835,979 
308,940 

30.0 
958,381 
451,903 

25.6 
9,757,862 
3,072,487 

27  0 

12.591,852 

4.438,459 

25-5 
*9,5'2,89i 
♦3,056,000 

27.0 

12,437,28a 

4,296,245 

3... 

416,362 
271,100 

26.9 

31-2 

197.341 
254,562 

23-9 

* I. 690,000 

*i,382,487 

25.6 
2,546,037 
1,802,422 

23.8 
♦1,787,000 
♦1,263,000 

25.6 

2,518,107 
1,778,138 

60.7 

43-7 

*55.o 

58.5 

♦58.0 

58.6 

1.769,649 
1,084,187 

1,144,919 

1,410,191 
958,381 

197,341 

",935 

242,627 

12,830,349 
9.757,862 

*  1,690,000 
♦95,000 

16,940,311 
12,591,852 

2,546,037 
236,069 

1,566,353 

12,568,891 
9,512,891 

16,733.527 

12,437,282 

♦15,000 

416,362 
271,100 

♦1,787,000 

♦90,000 

1,263,000 

2,518,107 

123.774 

1,544.398 

1,500,549 

4,028 

1,155.722 

♦14,876,852 

15.373.938 

1*11,390,000 
♦335,000 
♦  55,000 

♦15,094,163 
♦420,000 

♦75,000 

4,251 

22,441 
47.730 

♦60,000 
♦15,000 
♦40,000 
♦110,000 
♦30,000 
♦25,000 

♦75,000 

*20,000 

♦50,000 

♦150,000 

♦10,000 

♦40,000 

11,055,000 

♦14,675,000 

22.4 
87.9 

23.7 

87.7 

[1892.] 
1.336,493 
22.0 
90.0 

739,918 
18.4 

717.225 

X5.2 

9,218,550 
18.4 

[1892.] 
12,179,369 
19.4 

9,210,970 
18.6 
83.3 

[1892.] 

12,081,316 

18.9 
78.8 

56 


jBeen^e  on  ©overnment. 


Table  II.— POPULAR  VOTE   FOR   PRESIDENT 


1824 
1828 


1830  (census  year) , 


1832 
1836 


1840  (census  year) . 


1844 
1848 


1850  (census  year) . 


1852 

1856 

I 

1864 

1868 

I 

1872 

1876 

I 

1884 
1888 

1892 


i860  (census  year) 


1870  [corrected]  (census  year) 


i83o  (census  year) . 


1890  (census  year) . 


Population. 


The  Union. 


12,866,020 


17.069,453 


23,191,876 


31.443.321 


38.S58.371 


50.155.783 


62,622,250 


States. 


12,820.868 


17,019,641 


23,067,262 


31,183,744 


38,115,641 


49.371.340 


61,908,906 


Note. — Asterisks  denote  estimates.  In  Table  I  the  figures  have  been  verified, 
and  in  part  compiled,  by  Mr.  Theodore  C.  Smith.  In  Table  II  the  figures  from  1870 
to  1876  are  corrected  according  to  the  Eleventh  Census  Bulletin,  No.  16,  p.  3.     The 


jlEicicise  of  tbe  SutEiagc. 


57 


COMPARED   WITH   THE    POPULATION.     (1824-1892.) 


Voters, 

Votes. 

Voting  States 
e  x  c  luding 
negroes    to 
1868. 

Males  of  vot- 
ing    race 
above  21  in 
States. 

Normal  Vot- 
ers    (half 
foreigners 
includ  ed 
to  1870). 

Number  of 
Votes. 

Per  cent, 
of  Pop- 
ulation. 

Per  cent, 
of  Legal 

Voters, 

352,062 
1,156,328 

16.9 

17.0 
17.2 
16.7 

15-4 
19.0 
18.6 
18.7 
19.2 

18.9 

78.0 
80.0 

81.2 

"78.8 

1824 

2,329,728 

1828 

10,633,323 

2,262,685 

1830 

1,250,799 
1,498,205 
2,410,778 
2,698,611 
!      2,871,908 

1832 

1836 

14,317.850 

3.278,385 

3,038,288 

1840 
1844 

i 

1 

1848 

19,517,940 

4,684,883 
*5, 222,314 

4.313.044 


1850 

3,144,201 
4,052,967 
4.676,853 
4.166,537 
5,724,684 

1852 

1856 

25.965.833 
"24,250,000 
"34,282,350 

6,870,152 

5,629,310 

i860 
1864 

1868 

9,298,047 

7,627,878 
•• 

1870 

*4i,3i2,ooo 
*44, 179,000 

49,371.340 
"53,664,032 
"59,300,000 

61,908,906 
"64,000,000 

6,466,165 

8,412,733 

9.210,395 

10,056,347 

11,387,029 

12,081,316 

1 

1872 

1876 

12,571.445 

"11.340,000 

18S0 
1884 

1888 

16,733.527 

14,675,000 
"15,320,000 

1890 
1892 



estimates  of  "legal  voters"  for  1850  and  1852  are  from  the  Compendium  of  the 
Seventh  Census,  Introduction ;  the  other  years  are  calculated  by  Mr.  Smith.  The 
"  legal  voters  "  in  1890  is  an  exact  total  calculated  from  the  Census. 


III. 

THE   ELECTION   OF  A   PRESIDENT. 


On  November  8,  1892,  the  voters  of  the  United 
States  were  called  upon  to  indicate  their  choice 
for  President.  It  may,  therefore,  be  interesting 
to  consider  the  manner  in  which  such  contests  are 
carried  on,  and  the  questions  which  have  arisen  in 
previous  presidential  elections. 

The  "  campaign,"  as  the  electoral  struggle  is 
popularly  called,  begins  when  the  candidates  are 
nominated,  but  the  preliminaries  go  back  to  about 
a  year  before  the  election.  In  the  early  part  of 
the  century,  nominations  were  often  made  two  or 
even  three  years  before  the  election  ;  but  since  the 
adoption  of  the  great  nominating  conventions  in 
1832  it  is  usual  not  to  decide  upon  the  candidates 
until  May  or  June  of  the  electoral  year.  In  only 
three  cases  has  there  been  an  uncontested  elec- 
tion— Washington,  chosen  in  1788-89  and  1792; 
and  Monroe's  second  election  in  1820.  The  in- 
cumbent of  the  office,  if  in  his  first  term,  almost 
always  hopes  for  a  renomination.  Of  the  twenty- 
three  persons  elected  as   President,  four  died  in 

(58) 


jElcction  of  ipresi&ent.  59 

office,  seven  were  re-elected,  four  were  defeated 
for  a  second  term,  and  four  only,  Polk,  Pierce, 
Buchanan,  and  Hayes,  did  not  receive  the  renomi- 
nation  of  their  own  party.  It  is  noteworthy  that 
not  one  of  the  four  Presidents  who  came  into  office 
from  the  Vice-Presidency  through  the  death  of 
the  President  received  a  renomination. 

The  machinery  by  which  candidates  are  put 
forward  has  now  become  well  established.  The 
voters  of  each  party  are  supposed  by  a  system  of 
indirect  elections  to  choose  delegates  to  the  Na- 
tional Convention.  In  fact,  the  number  of  voters 
who  participate  in  this  primary  process  is  always 
small,  and  in  many  places  is  not  a  tenth  of  the 
party  strength.  Still,  the  National  Conventions 
are  bodies  of  delegates  twice  as  large  as  the  Senate 
and  House  of  Representatives  put  together;  count- 
ing now  808,  they  are  too  large  to  be  controlled 
by  a  few  politicians,  and  both  the  great  party  con- 
ventions in  1892  nominated  candidates  much  more 
acceptable  to  the  rank  and  file  of  their  respective 
parties  than  to  the  political  leaders. 

With  the  candidates  each  party  puts  out  a  plat- 
form of  its  principles.  By  long-established  usage 
it  is  customary  on  questions  upon  which  the  party 
itself  is  divided  to  introduce  a  "  straddle  "—that 
is,  a  statement  which  will  bear  one  construction  in 
one  part  of  the  country  and  another  in  another. 
Nevertheless,  there  have  been  some  cases  of  very 
bold  and  outspoken  "  planks  "  in  party  platforms. 


6o  Bssags  on  Government. 


Thus  in  1856  the  Republican  party  in  its  first  con- 
vention denounced  "  those  twin  relics  of  barbarism 
— polygamy  and  slavery,"  and  in  1892  the  Demo- 
cratic Convention  declared  that  "we  denounce 
Republican  protection  as  a  fraud." 

The  engine  of  the  "  campaign  "  for  each  party  is 
a  "  National  Committee,"  composed  of  one  mem- 
ber from  each  State ;  it   is  the  duty  of  this  com- 
mittee to  adopt  a  plan  of  campaign  ;  to  organize 
political  meetings,  and  to  circulate  political  litera- 
ture ;  and  to  raise  and  to  disburse  the  necessary 
funds.     The  chairman  of  the  committee  has  very 
large  responsibility,  and  one  of  his  duties  is  to  pre- 
vent the  candidate  from  writing  entangling  letters 
or  making  damaging  speeches.     It   is  customary 
for  the  candidate  to  efface  himself  during  the  cam- 
paign ;   the  most   notable  exceptions   have   been 
the  public  speeches  of  William  Henry  Harrison  in 
1840,  and   of  James  G.  Blaine,  in    1884,  both  of 
which    provoked    serious    comment.     The   candi- 
date, however,  may  make  a  speech  on  accepting 
his  nomination,  and  is  expected  to  write  an  elab- 
orate letter  of  acceptance,  which  is  considered  the 
key-note  of  the  campaign.     Mr.  Cleveland  made 
several  public  speeches  during  the  canvass  of  1892. 
Money  is  liberally  used  for  three  main  purposes. 
The  first  is  the  education  of  the  voter  by  circulat- 
ing political  documents  and  by  holding  political 
meetings.     A  new  device  introduced  into  the  last 
campaign  will   save  large  sums  of  money  to  the 


Election  of  iprcslC>cnt.  6i 

campaign  committees  :  members  of  Congress  are 
by  custom  allowed  to  print  extracts  as  part  of  their 
speeches  ;  and  both  Democratic  and  Republican 
members  in  the  previous  session  managed  thus  to 
introduce  whole  books,  section  by  section.  Thus 
Henry  George's  "  Progress  and  Poverty  "  is  spread 
at  large  on  the  records  of  Congressional  debates. 
The  speeches  containing  these  extracts  are  circu- 
lated under  the  frank  of  the  Congressman  who 
made  them.  The  second  use  of  money  is  to  keep 
up  a  semi-military  organization  in  both  parties, 
the  chief  object  of  which  is  to  appear  a  few  times 
during  the  campaign  in  torch-light  processions. 
This  custom  sprang  up  in  i860.  The  only  persons 
who  have  a  personal  interest  in  the  drill  and  in 
the  cheap  gaudy  uniforms  are  half-grown  boys, 
not  yet  voters — but  neither  party  has  felt  safe  in 
omitting  this  means  of  impressing  the  imagination 
of  the  voters.  In  the  campaign  of  1892  this  sys- 
tem was  noticeably  little  used.  The  third  use  of 
money  is  for  the  purchase  of  votes  outright.  Al- 
though made  more  difficult  by  the  new  ballot  re- 
form laws  in  most  of  the  States,  it  is  still  practised 
openly  and  unblushingly.  For  reasons  which  will 
appear  later,  the  money  is  spent  most  liberally  in 
large  States  having  a  very  close  vote. 

Who  are  the  voters  whose  suffrages  are  thus  de- 
sired and  beguiled  ?  Under  the  Constitution 
"  each  State  shall  appoint,  in  such  Manner  as  the 
Legislature  thereof  may  direct,  a  Number  of  Elec- 


62  Bssa^s  on  (Sovcrnment. 

tors,  equal  to  the  whole  number  of  Senators  and 
Representatives  to  which  the  State  may  be  en- 
titled in  the  Congress."  It  therefore  follows  that 
a  President  might  be  elected  without  any  voter 
directly  taking  part.  In  early  days  many  of  the 
State  Legislatures  appointed  the  electors  them- 
selves without  further  reference  to  their  constitu- 
ents. By  common  consent  this  privilege  has  been 
given  up  ;  it  not  infrequently  happened  that  the 
Legislature  which  thus  cast  the  vote  no  longer 
represented  the  people  of  the  State.  Another 
method  which  had  more  to  recommend  it  was  for 
the  Legislature  to  divide  the  State  into  districts, 
each  of  which  might  choose  an  elector.  Between 
1832  and  1892  no  instance  occurred  in  which  this 
device  was  used.  In  1890,  however,  a  Democratic 
Legislature  was  chosen  in  Michigan  ;  foreseeing 
that  the  majority  in  the  State  as  a  whole  would 
be  Republican,  they  passed  a  lav/  reviving  this  ob- 
solete system  for  that  State.  The  device  was  suc- 
cessful, and  the  electoral  vote  of  Michigan  was 
divided  in  1892.  So  much  popular  prejudice  was 
aroused  by  the  act  that  a  test  case  was  made  up 
and  brought  before  the  United  States  courts,  urg- 
ing that  it  was  unconstitutional  ;  but  it  was  de- 
cided that  the  Legislature  had  acted  within  its 
powers.  The  almost  universal  method  is  for  the 
Legislature  to  direct  that  each  voter  may  cast  his 
ballot  for  as  many  electors  as  the  State  is  entitled 
to  choose.     This  so-called  "general  ticket  system" 


Blectlon  of  ipiesi&cnt.  63 


is,  of  course,  the  French  scrutin  de  liste.  This 
method  has  serious  and  disagreeable  consequences : 
a  very  small  preponderance  in  a  State  having  a 
large  number  of  voters  may  decide  and  usually 
does  decide,  the  whole  contest.  In  the  three  elec- 
tions of  1880,  1884,  and  1888  the  vote  of  New 
York  was  necessary  to  the  winning  candidate; 
and  the  majorities  in  that  State  were  respectively 
21,000,  1,150,  and  14,000,  Hence  in  large  and 
thickly  populated  States,  particularly  New  York 
and  Indiana,  most  strenuous  and  often  very  cor- 
rupt efforts  are  made  to  secure  the  largest  vote 
possible  on  each  side.  A  further  result  is  that 
Presidents  are  not  infrequently  elected  who  have 
much  less  than  a  popular  majority.  Many  reme- 
dies have  been  proposed  :  the  most  ingenious  is 
that  in  each  State  the  total  electoral  vote  should 
be  divided  pro  rata  among  the  various  parties  in 
proportion  to  their  total  popular  vote.  This 
would  give  great  encouragement  to  minorities 
throughout  the  Union,  but  would  take  away  the 
great  power  now  vested  in  a  few  voters  in  large 
States.  As  no  general  change  can  be  made  except 
by  a  constitutional  amendment,  there  is  no  imme- 
diate hope  of  this  reform. 

Who  are  the  voters  who  cast  their  ballots  in 
November,  1892  ?  Here  comes  in  one  of  the  an- 
omalies of  the  American  Constitution.  The  Leg- 
islatures may  make  such  persons  voters  as  they 
please.     They  have  chosen,  with  a  few  unimpor- 


64  JBssags  on  ©ovcrnment. 

tant  exceptions,  to  bestow  the  suffrage  upon  every 
native  man  more  than  twenty-one  years  of  age, 
convicts,  criminals,  insane,  and  defective  persons 
alone  excluded.  In  only  one  State  in  the  Union  is 
there  any  longer  a  property  qualification  ;  tax  quali- 
fications have  disappeared  except  in  two  States. 
Three  States  only,  Massachusetts,  Connecticut,  and 
Mississippi,  disfranchise  persons  who  are  not  able 
to  read  and  write,  and  in  the  last  of  these  States 
the  provision  is  liberally  interpreted  so  as  to  ex- 
clude blacks  and  admit  whites.  Three  additions 
to  the  usual  category  of  voters  must  be  noticed. 
In  one  State,  Wyoming,  the  least  important  in  the 
Union,  women  are  admitted  to  the  suffrage.  In  all 
the  States  naturalized  aliens  more  than  twenty-one 
years  of  age  vote  on  equal  terms  with  natives :  of 
4,300,000  such  persons  2,500,000  are  naturalized. 
The  third  addition  is  made  in  many  States  by 
their  admitting  to  the  suffrage  persons  who  have 
declared  their  intention  of  becoming  citizens.  The 
total  number  of  voters  in  1892  was  about  14,675,- 
000;  the  total  vote  reached  12,081,306.  The  sta- 
tistics show  in  general  a  slow  increase  in  the  num- 
ber of  votes  cast  in  proportion  to  the  population — 
that  is,  in  interest  in  Presidential  elections.  The 
election  of  1892  is  an  exception  ;  the  vote  is  smaller 
in  proportion  than  twelve  years  ago,  probably  a  re- 
sult of  deliberate  refusal  on  the  part  of  many  voters 
to  vote  their  usual  party  ticket.  Of  the  voters  who 
do  not  appear  at  the  polls,  more  than  two-thirds 


jElcctlon  of  ipieslDcnt.  65 

can  be  accounted  for  by  various  accidents :  loss  of 
legal  residence  is  very  frequent  in  a  country  where 
there  is  so  much  shifting  about.  The  percentage 
of  voters  to  population  is  larger  than  in  Ger- 
many, a  country  with  compact  population,  good 
roads,  and  great  interest  in  political  matters. 

The  details  of  the  election  are  commonly  left  to 
State  legislation,  although  Congress  has  constitu- 
tional power  to  make  such  regulations  as  it  chooses. 
It  has  passed  only  one  statute  on  the  subject,  mak- 
ing it  possible  to  appoint  Federal  supervisors  of 
elections  in  the  great  cities.  The  popular  im- 
pression of  that  act  is  that  it  was  intended  to 
give  the  Republicans  some  control  over  the  elec- 
tions in  the  Democratic  city  of  New  York.  In 
1890  the  so-called  "Force  Bill,"  a  general  Act  pro- 
viding for  Federal  control  of  elections  throughout 
the  United  States,  came  very  near  passing  through 
Congress.  It  was  defeated  only  by  a  singular 
political  combination :  certain  Democratic  mem- 
bers and  senators  agreed  to  vote  for  free  silver 
coinage,  if  Republican  senators  would  vote  against 
the  election  bill.  The  bill  has  been  vigorously 
attacked,  and  is  now  apparently  dropped  by  the 
Republican  party,  which  made  itself  responsible 
for  it. 

The  only  national  rule  for  elections  is  that  they 
shall  all  be  held  on  the  same  day.  Since  1845 
that  day  has  been  the  Tuesday  after  the  first  Mon- 
day in  November.  For  many  years  some  of  the 
5 


66  Essays  on  (Sorcrnment. 


States  continued  to  hold  separate  elections  for 
State  officers  in  October.  The  results  were  likely 
to  have  great  influence  on  the  national  elections  a 
month  later,  and  hence  desperate  attempts  were 
made  by  both  parties  to  carry  these  States,  and 
large  sums  of  money  were  used  in  the  purchase  of 
votes.  Ohio  and  Indiana  were  the  States  most 
affected  by  this  system.  Almost  every  State  now 
holds  its  State  election  on  the  same  day  as  the  na- 
tional election.  The  saving  in  time  and  expense 
is  very  considerable,  but  the  coincidence  of  the 
two  systems  makes  it  possible  to  enter  into  so- 
called  "deals,"  "trades,"  or  "combinations." 
Thus  it  was  popularly  believed  in  New  York  in 
1888  that  some  ten  or  fifteen  thousand  Repub- 
lican voters  agreed  to  cast  their  ballots  for  the 
Democratic  candidate  for  Governor  if  an  equal 
number  of  Democratic  votes  were  cast  for  the  Re- 
publican candidate  for  Presidential  electors;  and 
that  the  election  of  David  B.  Hill  as  Governor 
and  of  Benjamin  Harrison  as  President  was  thus 
accomplished.  In  only  one  State  in  the  Union  is 
an  absolute  majority  required ;  the  ticket  for 
Presidential  electors  receiving  the  largest  total  of 
votes  is  held  to  be  chosen.  Hence  second  elec- 
tions are  not  necessary,  and  on  the  morning  after 
election  day  the  result  is  almost  always  ascer- 
tained. 

The  electors  always  live  in  the  State  from  which 
they  are  chosen,  and  it  is  customary  to  put  on  the 


TElcctton  of  picslDcnt.  ^7 


ticket  one  man  from  each  congressional  district. 
Vacancies  frequently  occur  by  the  death  of  elec- 
tors between  the  time  of  their  choice  and  the  time 
of  meeting  ;  the  question  then  arises  whether  in 
such  a  case  the  candidate  having  the  number  of 
votes  next  to  that  of  the  lowest  elector  on  the 
successful  ticket  shall  be  considered  elected.  As 
this  means  a  transfer  of  the  vote  from  one  political 
party  to  the  other  the  principle  has  been  strenu- 
ously resisted,  and  it  is  the  practice  for  some 
State  authority  to  fill  the  vacancy.  In  the  hotly 
contested  election  of  1876  one  vacancy  was  filled, 
without  any  distinct  statute,  by  the  other  electors 
on  the  ticket. 

It  was  originally  intended  that  the  choice  of 
electors  should  be  simply  a  preliminary,  and  that 
they  should  exercise  their  unbiassed  judgment  in 
the  selection  of  a  President.  Under  ordinary  cir- 
cumstances, however,  the  electors  are  simply  a 
registering  machine.  The  botiy  of  electors  in 
each  State  constitutes  an  "  electoral  college,"  and 
each  such  body  holds  a  meeting  on  the  first  Wed- 
nesday of  January  for  the  purpose  of  casting  bal- 
lots. Absentees  are  almost  unknown  ;  although 
in  1800  a  Maryland  elector  failed  to  attend.  Un- 
til 1804  each  elector  cast  two  ballots  without  dis- 
tinsuishingr  between  his  candidate  for  the  Presi- 
dency  and  his  candidate  for  the  Vice- Presidency. 
This  led  to  the  celebrated  deadlock  of  1801,  when 
Jefferson  and   Burr  each  received  one  vote  from 


68  Bssa^s  on  Government. 

each  of  the  Republican  electors,  and  there  was  a 
tie.  Under  the  system  which  has  obtained  since 
1804,  each  elector  casts  one  vote  for  President 
and  one  vote  for  Vice-President.  The  results  of 
the  ballot  in  each  college  are  then  declared,  and 
the  returns  are  sealed  up  and  despatched  to  the 
authorities  of  the  United  States  in  Washington. 
The  office  of  messenger  to  carry  the  ballots,  espe- 
cially from  the  distant  States,  is  much  esteemed, 
since  it  gives  an  opportunity  for  a  pleasure  trip  at 
the  expense  of  the  Government. 

In  order  to  make  their  votes  of  any  effect,  the 
electors  must  observe  the  constitutional  qualifica- 
tions of  the  President.  He  must  be  a  natural  born 
citizen  of  the  United  States.  At  the  time  the 
Constitution  was  framed  there  was  an  exception 
in  favor  of  persons  already  naturalized  in  the 
United  States  ;  this  clause  is  supposed  to  have 
been  inserted  so  as  to  make  Alexander  Hamilton, 
who  was  born  in  Nevis,  eligible  for  the  Presi- 
dency. The  only  question  which  has  ever  arisen 
out  of  this  clause  was  a  query  as  to  whether 
President  Arthur  was  not  born  just  over  the  Ver- 
mont boundary  in  Canada.  The  President  must 
be  thirty-five  years  old.  He  must  have  been  four- 
teen years  a  resident  of  the  United  States ;  foreign 
diplomatic  service  is  technically  included  in  such 
a  residence.  The  Vice-President  must  have  the 
same  qualifications.  There  is  no  constitutional 
reason  why   both    President   and   Vice-President 


Blecttou  of  iprestOcnt.  69 

should  not  reside  in  the  same  State,  although  it  is 
customary  to  choose  them  from  widely  separated 
sections. 

The  whole  question  of  qualification  is  rather 
one  for  conventions  than  for  electoral  colleges, 
since  the  electors  vote  for  persons  previously  des- 
ignated by  nominating  conventions.  In  1876, 
when  the  election  turned  upon  a  single  vote,  and 
there  was  great  confusion,  it  was  suggested  that 
an  elector  should  vote  for  some  neutral  candidate, 
and  thus  bring  about  a  tie  which  must  be  settled 
by  the  House  of  Representatives.  Not  one  of 
the  183  Republican  electors  paid  heed  to  this 
suggestion.  Some  attempt  was  made  at  that 
time  to  buy  an  elector's  vote ;  but  in  order  to  re- 
ceive the  bribe  the  elector  must  change  in  the  face 
of  the  whole  country,  and  there  is  not  the  slightest 
danger  that  such  an  attempt  could  be  successful. 

Electors  have,  however,  been  obliged  to  exercise 
their  own  judgment,  owing  to  the  death  of  the 
candidate  for  President  or  Vice-President  between 
the  time  of  the  election  and  the  assembling  of  the 
colleges.  The  most  noted  instance  was  that  of 
1872  :  sixty-six  Democratic  electors  were  chosen, 
pledged  to  vote  for  Horace  Greeley  for  President 
and  for  B,  Gratz  Brown  for  Vice  -  President. 
Greeley  died  ;  the  electors  were  already  in  a  small 
minority,  and  finally  forty-two  of  them  voted  for  a 
prominent  living  Democrat,  eighteen  for  Brown 
for  President,  and   three  soberly  cast  their  ballots 


70  JEasags  on  (Bovcrnment. 

for  Horace  Greelex^,  or  his  shade.  Should  a  can- 
didate  die  who  had  a  majority  of  electors  in  his 
favor  there  is  no  precedent  to  decide  what  shall 
be  done.  Either  his  supporters  in  the  electoral 
colleges  would  choose  as  President  the  person  des- 
ignated for  the  Vice- Presidency,  or,  as  is  much 
more  likely,  a  new  national  convention  of  the 
party  would  be  assembled  and  nominate  a  candi- 
date ;  and  in  such  a  case  the  nomination  would 
undoubtedly  be  followed  by  the  electors. 

On  the  first  Wednesday  in  February  the  House 
and  Senate  assemble  together  to  count  the  elec- 
toral vote.  The  framers  of  the  Constitution  ap- 
pear to  have  had  in  mind  the  simple  arithmetical 
process  of  adding  the  results  forwarded  from  the 
electoral  colleges  ;  but  if,  as  has  frequently  hap- 
pened, there  are  two  sets  of  returns  from  the  same 
State,  or  the  validity  of  the  single  return  is  dis- 
puted, there  must  be  some  tribunal  to  decide 
which  is  to  be  counted.  The  framers  of  the  Con- 
stitution appear  to  have  overlooked  this  possible 
difficulty.  On  that  decision  in  1876  depended  the 
result  of  the  election.  In  1865  a  joint  rule  was 
adopted  by  which,  in  case  objection  was  made  to 
any  vote,  it  could  be  counted  only  by  agreement 
of  both  Houses.  At  that  time  the  Senate  and 
House  were  both  strongly  Republican,  and  in 
1873  the  votes  of  two  States  were  rejected  in  this 
manner.  When,  after  the  election  of  1876,  in  which 
Tilden    and    Hayes   were  the  rival  candidates,  it 


jElectioii  of  ipvesiDent.  71 

was  seen  that  disputed  returns  were  certain  to 
come  in,  the  House  was  Democratic,  and  the  Sen- 
ate refused  to  continue  the  rule.  In  every  in- 
stance the  House  set  up  such  a  construction  of 
the  law  as  was  likely  to  bring  in  a  Democratic  re- 
turn ;  and  the  Senate  attempted  in  every  disputed 
case  to  bring  in  a  Republican  return  :  there  was 
an  absolute  deadlock,  and  threats  of  civil  war. 
The  difificulty  was  overcome  by  an  extra-judicial 
"  Electoral  Commission,"  the  result  of  whose  de- 
cision the  Senate  and  House  had  both  asrreed  to 
accept. 

An  Act  of  1887  has  attempted  to  prevent  the 
recurrence  of  such  difficulties.  Wherever  a  State 
has  erected  a  tribunal  with  power  to  decide  in 
cases  of  disputed  returns,  the  finding  of  that  tri- 
bunal is  to  be  accepted  by  Congress.  If  there  is 
no  such  tribunal  the  vote  of  the  State  may  be 
thrown  out  altogether,  unless  both  Houses  concur 
in  receiving  it. 

Three  times  the  count  of  electoral  votes  has 
shown  no  choice.  Under  the  Constitution  the  suc- 
cessful candidate  must  have  a  majority  of  all  the 
votes.  In  1800  Jefferson  and  Burr  had  each  sev- 
enty-three ;  and,  as  is  required  in  such  cases,  the 
election  then  was  made  by  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives, the  members  from  each  State  casting 
one  vote  conjointly.  At  that  time  the  House  was 
Federalist,  and  both  the  persons  eligible  were  Re- 
publicans.    Since  the  Federalists  must  select  from 


72  jBsen^s  on  Government. 


adversaries,  at  first  they  aimed  to  choose  Burr, 
who  had  been  intended  by  his  own  party  for  the 
Vice- Presidency.  Excitement  ran  very  high,  till 
the  Federalists  yielded  and  permitted  the  election 
of  Jefferson.  In  1825  the  House  was  called  upon 
to  select  the  President  from  the  three  candidates, 
Jackson,  John  Quincy  Adams,  and  Crawford;  and 
they  chose  Adams,  although  he  had  fewer  elec- 
toral votes,  and  fewer  popular  votes,  than  Jackson. 
In  1836  there  was  no  choice  for  Vice-President, 
and  the  Senate  chose  R.  M.  Johnson. 

What  was  the  purpose  and  the  effect  of  this  in- 
direct vote  ?  It  arose  out  of  an  unwillingness  to 
submit  either  to  the  people  direct  or  to  Congress 
the  choice  of  so  important  an  officer.  It  was 
thought  that  the  indirect  system  would  concen- 
trate attention  on  personal  character  and  would 
prevent  the  election  of  mere  popular  heroes. 
There  was  a  very  just  distrust  of  permitting  Con- 
gress to  serve  as  the  electoral  body  ;  it  was  felt 
that  candidates  would  intrigue,  would  make 
pledges  in  advance,  and  thus  that  Congress  would 
be  more  likely  to  make  the  Executive  its  instru- 
ment. It  must  be  remembered  that  the  President, 
once  chosen,  is,  under  the  Constitution,  quite  free 
from  any  direct  interference  by  Congress  ;  his  po- 
sition was,  therefore,  intentionally  made  different 
from  that  of  the  English  Prime  Minister.  To 
leave  his  choice  to  Congress  would  have  enabled 
it  to  put  a  man  in  power  whom   for  four  years 


lElection  of  ipreslOcnt.  73 


it  could  not  reach,  and  the  natural  tendency  of 
that  system  must  have  been  to  bring  forward 
weak  Presidents  rather  than  strong.  The  system 
of  choice  by  the  Legislature  has  been  very  suc- 
cessful in  Switzerland,  but  the  present  condition 
of  the  President  in  the  French  Republic  shows 
what  might  have  been  reasonably  apprehended  in 
America. 

A  general  popular  vote,  a  plebiscite,  was  not 
thought  of  when  the  Constitution  was  framed  in 
1789;  there  never  had  been  any  general  national 
elections  ;  and  it  was  plain  that  under  such  a  sys- 
tem a  few  populous  States  agreeing  together  could 
out-weigh  the  rest  of  the  Union.  The  indirect 
system  was  therefore  chosen,  as  retaining  the  ele- 
ment of  popular  government,  and  at  the  same  time 
preserving  the  influence  of  the  small  States. 

Many  suggestions  have  been  made  that  a  general 
popular  election  be  substituted  for  the  present  sys- 
tem. The  "  reform  "  would  bring  very  serious  dif- 
ficulties. In  case  of  very  close  votes  like  that  of 
1880,  when  there  was  a  popular  majority  of  15,000 
out  of  a  vote  of  more  than  9,000,000,  it  might  take 
many  weeks  to  ascertain  the  precise  vote  of  each 
party,  and  thus  to  declare  the  election.  The 
States  in  which  one  party  is  decidedly  in  the  as- 
cendant would  offer  great  opportunities  for  fraud, 
since  there  is  no  large  and  well-organized  minority 
to  detect  it.  Furthermore,  of  late  years  it  is  un- 
usual for  any  candidate  to  have  a  majority  of  all 


74  Bssags  on  Government. 

the    popular    votes,   owing    to    the  appearance    of 
third  party  candidates. 

The   main   reason  for   establishing  the    indirect 
system  was  to  assure  the  small  States  that  a  Pres- 
ident should    not  be  forced  upon  them  ;  but  the 
unexpected  and  irregular  growth  of  the  Union  has 
caused  some  curious  anomalies.     Thus,  New  York 
has    a   population    of   more  than    6,000,000,    and 
chooses  thirty-six  electors,  an  average  of  one  for 
every  168,000  persons.     Nevada  has  a  population 
of  about  45,000,  and  chooses  three  electors,  an  av- 
erage of  about  15,000  persons  to  each  elector.     It 
is  quite  possible  for  a  President  to  be  chosen  who 
has    less  than  a  majority  of   the  votes.     Zachary 
Taylor,    in    1848,    was    in  a  minority  of    140,000. 
James    Buchanan,  in    1856,  General    Garfield,   in 
1880,  Grover  Cleveland,  in  1884  and  in  1892,  and 
Benjamin    Harrison,  in    1888,  each  had  less  than 
half  the  votes  cast.     Hayes  was  made  President  in 
1877,  though  he  had  250,000  less  votes  than  Til- 
den ;  and    in    i860  President    Lincoln  received  a 
majority  of  the  electoral  votes,  though  he  had  but 
1,800,000  votes  against   2,800,000   cast    for  three 
other  candidates   conjointly.     Popular   majorities 
are  sometimes   overwhelming,   as    when    General 
Grant  had   700,000  more  than  Horace  Greeley  in 
1872;  they  are  often  very  small.     In   1844  Polk 
had  but  38,000,     Since  1872  the  aggregate  vote  of 
the  two  great  parties  has  been  very  close.     It  is 
evident  that  sons  as  they  come  to  their  maturity 


Blectlon  of  ipiesiDent.  75 

usually  vote  as  their  fathers  have  voted.  The 
Democratic  success  in  the  Congressional  election 
of  1890,  and  apparently  also  in  the  Presidential 
election  of  1892,  was  due  not  to  the  conversion  of 
voters  from  one  party  to  another,  but  to  the  fact 
that  many  thousands  of  Republican  electors  stayed 
away  in  thickly  populated  electoral  districts. 

Intimidation  and  fraud  have  played  a  great  part 
in  Presidential  elections.  In  1874  the  Democrats 
regained  possession  of  the  State  governments  in 
the  South,  and  of  the  House  of  Representatives 
in  Congress,  by  preventing  the  blacks  from  vot- 
inp' :  and  six  or  seven  hundred  thousand  negro 
voters  stayed  away  from  the  polls  in  1892.  The 
only  Presidential  elections  into  which  ballot  stuff- 
ing and  fraudulent  counting  of  votes  have  seriously 
entered  are  those  of  1844  and  1876.  The  Demo- 
crats of  1844  carried  Louisiana  for  Polk  by  in- 
creasing their  vote  in  one  parish  from  310  to  i,- 
007.  These  votes  were  cast  by  a  crowd  of  men 
on  a  steamer,  who  moved  from  polling  place  to 
polling  place,  depositing  their  ballots  in  each. 

The  complicated  electoral  machinery  takes  more 
account  of  the  State  vote  than  of  the  popular 
vote.  Usually  every  State  holds  its  electoral  col- 
lege, but  in  the  very  first  election  of  1788  New 
York,  owing  to  a  quarrel  in  the  Legislature,  cast 
no  votes  at  all.  Several  times  States  have  at- 
tempted to  vote  before  they  were  fairly  admitted 
to  the  Union.     This  was  the  case  with  Missouri, 


^6  E0sa\>3  Qiw  Government. 


which  was  not  finally  admitted  until  after  the  elec- 
tion of  1820,  but  succeeded  in  getting  her  vote 
counted  in  that  election.  In  1864  eleven  States 
had  no  representation  in  the  electoral  college  be- 
cause they  were  engaged  in  civil  war  against  the 
Government;  and  as  late  as  1872  two  of  those 
States  were  still  not  allowed  to  vote.  There  is  a 
strong  feeling  of  civic  pride  in  casting  the  vote  of 
a  State  as  a  unit,  hence  the  deep-seated  popular 
objection  to  the  choice  of  electors  by  districts. 
The  effect  of  this  unit  vote  is  seen  by  the  fact  that 
in  nine  Presidential  elections  the  person  elected 
could  not  have  been  chosen  without  the  vote  of 
New  York.  It  is  in  this  way  that  the  voters  of 
the  great  States  gain  what  they  have  lost  by  the 
giving  of  electoral  votes  to  the  small  frontier 
States  ;  and  it  is  this  which  has  given  such  ex- 
traordinary political  force  to  the  so-called  "Mug- 
wumps." They  are  a  body  of  a  few  thousand 
men,  found  chiefly  in  Massachusetts  and  New 
York,  and  drawn,  for  the  most  past,  from  the  Re- 
publican party,  who  cannot  be  depended  upon  to 
vote  for  any  candidate  whom  they  do  not  person- 
ally approve.  The  retention  of  600  of  their  votes 
by  Mr,  Blaine  in  1884,  would  have  given  him  the 
Presidency. 

Many  of  the  forty-four  States  in  the  Union  can 
be  depended  upon  from  decade  to  decade  to  vote 
for  the  candidate  of  a  particular  party.  Texas  has 
never  cast  its  electoral  vote  for  any  but  a  Demo- 


Election  of  iprcslDent.  11 


crat  ;  Minnesota,  Vermont,  Massachusetts,  Rhode 
Island,  and  Iowa  have  uniformly  cast  Republican 
votes  for  President  since  the  party  was  founded  in 
1856.     In  1892  several  States  of  this  character,  as 
Illinois  and   Kansas,  were  at  last  detached.     This 
result  was  due  chiefly  to  the  growth  of  third  party 
movements.     With  few  exceptions,  since  the  Con- 
stitution was  founded  the  votes   in   the  electoral 
college  have  gone  for  one  of  two  candidates.    From 
i860  to  1888  there  were   no  electoral  votes  except 
Republican  and   Democratic,  although  in    1880  a 
labor  candidate  got   300,000  popular  votes.     The 
third   party    movements    arc   often    successful    in 
State  politics ;  they  may  obtain  a  majority  in  the 
Legislature,  or   even  elect  a  governor ;  but  they 
make  no  figure  in  the  Presidential  election  unless 
they  have  at  least  a  plurality  of  all  the  votes  cast 
in  some  State.    The  three  great  exceptions  to  this 
principle  have  been  the  elections  of  1824,  i860,  and 
1892.     The  first  was  a  personal  struggle  between 
four   candidates   not    differing   essentially   among 
themselves  in  political  principles.     In  the  election 
of   i860  the   Democratic  party  was  split,  and  the 
two  great  elements  of  the  Republican  party  had 
not  yet  got  together,  so  that   four  candidates  re- 
ceived  electoral   votes.     In    1892  four  States  and 
one  elector  in  a  fifth  State  cast  their  votes  for  the 
"  nominee"  of  a  "  People's  Party."     The  adoption 
of  the  system   of  proportional   representation    by 
which  each  party  in  each   State  should   receive  a 


7S  iBeen^e  on  ©ovcininciit. 


number  of  electors  proportioned  to  its  share  of  the 
total  vote  would  greatly  encourage  third  parties, 
since  it  would  enable  them  to  gain  a  few  votes  in 
many  States,  and  their  total  might  give  them  the 
balance  of  power  between  the  two  great  parties, 
thus  preventing  a  choice  by  electors.  It  would 
also  increase  the  interest  in  elections ;  at  present 
there  is  no  political  object  to  be  served  by  bring- 
ing out  a  large  vote  in  the  sure  States.  Should 
this  system  be  adopted — and  any  State  has  the 
constitutional  right  to  establish  it  for  itself — a  few 
third  party  electors  from  each  of  the  several  States 
would  combine  into  a  powerful  and  compact  mi- 
nority, perhaps  able  to  dictate  to  the  other  parties. 
On  the  same  day  as  the  Presidential  election 
comes  the  choice  of  representatives  for  the  first 
Congress  which  will  sit  under  the  new  President  ; 
and  in  many  States  the  Legislatures  are  chosen 
which  are  later  to  elect  senators.  November  8, 
1892,  was,  therefore,  an  opportunity  for  the  expres- 
sion of  popular  approval  or  disapproval  of  the  ad- 
ministration then  in  power.  The  electoral  machin- 
ery is  so  peculiar  that  a  change  in  the  Presidency, 
the  Senate,  and  the  Plouse,  all  through  one  elec- 
tion, is  very  unusual;  since  1874  there  have  been 
but  two  occasions  on  which  all  these  three  branches 
of  the  legislating  power  have  been  elected  from 
the  same  party.  The  Senate  changes  so  slowly 
that  it  practically  remains  as  the  bulwark  for  the 
defeated  party  until  it  can  recover  its  strength.    In 


jElection  of  picsiDcnt.  79 

1876,  and  again  in  1880,  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, elected  at  the  same  time  as  the  Republican 
Presidents  Hayes  and  Garfield,  was  Democratic. 
The  result,  when  the  Houses  are  of  different  par- 
ties, is  a  great  loss  of  efificiency ;  each  House  tries 
to  throw  upon  the  other  the  responsibility  for  bad 
legislation,  and  each  tries,  to  use  a  current  political 
phrase,  "to  put  the  other  in  a  hole"  by  forcing  it 
to  take  issue  on  some  question  against  its  will. 
Hence  the  control  of  the  Senate  by  the  Demo- 
crats, a  result  of  the  State  elections  of  1892,  is  an 
unusually  rapid  change,  and  is  promising  for  good 
government. 

The  Presidential  election  always  arouses  greater 
interest  than  any  local  or  State  election.  For  at 
least  two  months  the  country  is  in  an  uproar ; 
great  political  meetings  are  held  ;  there  are  torch- 
light processions ;  throughout  the  Union  there 
are  local  committees  in  charge  of  the  "  campaign," 
and  these  report  to  their  State  committee  and 
through  it  to  the  national.  Money  is  raised  by 
the  national  committee,  apportioned  among  the 
States,  and  sub-divided  so  as  to  reach  the  points 
where  it  can  accomplish  most.  The  last  days  be- 
fore the  election  are  days  of  intense  excitement. 
In  1880,  just  before  the  election  a  facsimile  of  a 
letter  advocating  the  use  of  Chinese  labor,  at- 
tributed to  General  Garfield,  was  spread  broadcast 
throughout  the  country  by  the  National  Demo- 
cratic Committee.     General  Garfield  instantly  de- 


8o  Bssags  on  Government. 

nied  that  the  letter  was  his,  and  it  was  afterward 
shown  to  be  a  clumsy  forgery.  The  Democratic 
Committee,  however,  declined  to  withdraw  it,  and 
the  result  was  that  in  California  the  Republican 
vote  was  so  much  reduced  that  five  Republican 
electors  failed  to  be  chosen.  It  was  generally  felt 
that  this  was  an  unworthy  trick,  and  it  is  not 
likely  to  be  repeated. 

On  the  night  of  the  election,  messengers  fur- 
nished beforehand  by  the  rival  parties,  transmit 
the  results  to  the  nearest  telegraph  office  as  soon 
as  the  count  is  made.  By  midnight  the  de- 
spatches begin  to  come  in  to  the  great  cities,  and 
a  comparatively  small  number  of  returns  suffices 
to  show  whether  the  tide  is  setting  one  way  or  the 
other.  The  candidates  usually  have  private  wires 
leading  to  their  houses,  and  are  furnished  with 
early  returns.  By  three  o'clock  in  the  morning 
the  newspapers  have  a  fairly  accurate  report.  The 
next  day  the  results  are  known  throughout  the 
Union,  and  within  two  days  the  excitement  and 
bad  feeling  of  the  campaign  have  disappeared. 
Whichever  candidate  is  chosen  the  people  settle 
down,  accept  the  inevitable,  and  there  is  a  general 
feeling  of  relief  that  business  may  go  on  for  a  time 
untroubled  by  political  questions. 


IV. 

DO    THE    PEOPLE   WISH   CIVIL   SER- 
VICE REFORM? 


President  Harrison,  in  his  first  annual  mes- 
sage, said  : 

"  When  those  holding  administrative  offices  so 
conduct  themselves  as  to  convince  just  political 
opponents  that  no  party  consideration  or  bias 
affects  in  any  way  the  discharge  of  their  public 
duties,  we  can  more  easily  stay  the  demand  for 
removals." 

Senator  Blair,  of  New  Hampshire,  is  reported 
recently  to  have  remarked  : 

"  Civil  service  reform  is  a  humbug ;  the  law 
should  be  blotted  from  the  statute  book;  I  defy 
anyone  to  show  one  single  instance  where  benefit 
has  resulted  from  it." 

Mr.  George  William  Curtis,  in  an  address  de- 
livered October  i,  i88g,  asserted  that 

"  A  conservative  and  patriotic  intelligence  .  .  . 
has  already  extorted  from  party  a  profession  of  re- 
6  (8i) 


82  Ejjsags  on  ©ovciument. 


form.     It  will  presently  compel  a  policy  of  reform. 
The  advance  is  sure." 


These  diverse  authorities  all  tacitly  assume  that 
they  are  expressing  the  wish  of  the  people  upon 
an  important  question  in  their  government.  It  is 
not  a  new  question.  It  is  now  twenty-six  years 
since  Mr.  Jenckes  first  began  the  agitation  to 
which  the  clumsy  name  "civil  service  reform  "  has 
become  affixed.  An  important  act  on  the  subject 
is  now  in  the  tenth  year  of  its  operation.  That 
act,  as  applied  by  three  presidents  in  succession, 
now  covers  about  43,800  servants  of  the  govern- 
ment, out  of  the  nearly  180,000  persons  employed 
in  all  civil  capacities  by  the  United  States.  At 
the  present  moment  the  friends  of  the  reform  are 
urging  a  further  extension  to  numerous  classes  of 
officials.  On  the  other  hand,  bills  for  the  repeal 
of  the  act  have  repeatedly  been  introduced  by 
influential  members  of  both  parties. 

The  writer  believes  that  the  evils  of  political 
appointments  are  such  as  will  eventually  destroy 
popular  government,  if  they  are  not  checked ;  and 
that  the  remedies  already  applied  are  good,  so  far 
as  they  go.  This  essay,  however,  will  be  devoted 
to  a  different  phase  of  the  question.  Leaving  out 
of  account  the  eager  hopes  of  the  reformers,  whose 
task  is  not  that  of  raising  difficulties,  and  the  ob- 
jections of  enemies,  who  are  prone  to  lay  stress  on 
small  defects  of  detail,  the  effort  will  be  made  to 


Clvtl  Service  IReforin.  83 


find  out  what  the  people  at  large  think  about  the 
matter,  why  the  reform  languishes,  and  what  hope 
there  is  of  arousing  public  interest.  For,  under  a 
popular  government,  it  is  the  sentiment  of  the 
man  of  average  intelligence,  education,  character, 
and  public  spirit  that  must  in  the  long  run  decide 
such  questions. 

The  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  dominant  will 
of  a  large  number  of  persons  is  so  great  that  we 
shall  try  first  to  discover  how  the  chosen  represen- 
tatives of  the  people  look  on  the  question  of  re- 
form ;  and  as  every  law  depends  for  its  final  effect 
upon  the  executive,  let  us  see  how  that  branch  of 
the  government  stands.  In  this  case  mere  neu- 
trality, a  mere  perfunctory  execution  of  the  law,  is 
worth  little.  The  terms  of  the  Pendleton  Act  of 
1883  leave  it  to  the  discretion  of  the  president,  for 
the  time  being,  whether  any  appointments  shall 
be  made  for  merit ;  and  even  that  act  provides  no 
bar  against  removals  for  oolitical  cause.  The  atti- 
tude  of  the  president  may  certainly  be  assumed  to 
be  rather  beyond  than  behind  popular  sentiment  ; 
for  the  president  is  a  man  accustomed  to  public 
affairs,  and  likely  to  feel  the  importance  of  "  the 
king's  business."  Every  president  wishes  to  have 
a  good,  honest,  successful,  and  popular  administra- 
tion ;  and  would,  if  left  to  himself,  make  few 
changes,  save  among  the  advisory  officers  of  the 
government.  But  administrative  reformers  must 
admit  that  no  president  is  left  to  himself.     He  is 


84  jEssags  on  Government. 

deflected  by  the  consideration  of  his  political  debts, 
by  the  effort  to  make  sure  a  re-election,  or  by  the 
influence  of  his  counsellors.  Equally  important, 
though  far  less  noticed,  is  the  personal  pressure  of 
friends  whom  a  president  likes  to  gratify.  Still 
stronger  is  the  consciousness  of  possessing  the 
power  to  make  a  career  for  one's  fellow-men. 
When  presidents  consume  their  time  in  docketing 
applications  for  offices,  it  is  because  the  compari- 
son of  candidates  brings  a  tickling  sense  of  imme- 
diate power,  not  brought  by  the  inauguration  of  a 
foreign  policy  or  the  championship  of  a  reform. 
A  president  does  what  seems  to  him  most  impor- 
tant. For  this  very  reason  he  is  unwilling  to  for- 
feit that  good-will  and  support  of  the  members  of 
his  party  in  Congress  that  is  necessary  to  carry 
through  the  statesmanlike  measures  dear  to  his 
heart.  It  is  no  wonder  that  no  president,  except 
Grant,  has  ever  attempted  distinctly  to  lead  pub- 
lic opinion  in  this  reform. 

From  the  heads  of  departments,  who  come  di- 
rectly into  contact  with  the  working  force  of  the 
government,  we  might  expect  a  greater  sense  of  the 
harm  produced  by  frequent  changes  ;  and  many 
of  them  are  grateful  for  the  relief  afforded  by  the 
Civil  Service  act.  Yet  few  of  them  have  ever 
had  the  courage,  within  their  own  departments,  to 
make  the  unwritten  rule  that  no  faithful  and  quiet 
official  shall  be  discharged.  If  they  and  if  the 
presidents  strictly  enforce  the  law  as  they  find  it 


Civil  Service  IRefoim.  85 

on  the  statute  book,  and  use  their  discretion 
gradually  to  extend  the  rules,  they  do  as  much 
as  the  average  man  expects. 

To  measure  public  sentiment,  and  to  determine 
the  responsibility  for  action,  we  must  therefore  go 
back  from  the  executors  of  the  law  to  the  makers  of 
the  law.  Much  otherwise  useful  political  philoso- 
phy is  based  on  the  mistaken  premise  that  the  mem- 
bers of  Congress  are  devoid  of  public  spirit,  sin- 
cerity, and  honor.  The  average  congressman  is 
more  alive  to  the  evils  of  political  appointments 
than  the  average  constituent.  But  if  congressmen, 
like  presidents,  have  friends  and  political  ties,  they, 
too,  enjoy  office-broking,  from  the  very  pleasure  of 
earning  gratitude,  or  of  doing  their  "  duty  to  their 
constituents."  Some  of  them  willingly  accept  the 
position  of  keeper  of  a  political  intelligence  ofifice 
for  their  constituents.  On  the  whole,  perhaps  the 
strongest  reason  for  the  lukewarm  support  given 
by  members  of  Congress  to  the  reform,  is  a  liking 
for  political  excitement  —  an  absorbing  interest 
which  takes  the  place  of  the  artistic  and  literary 
interest  of  older  communities.  Though  every 
congressman,  once  in,  may  see  that  if  the  merit 
system  were  altogether  established  he  would  be 
relieved  of  importunities,  and  perhaps  of  factions, 
he  wishes  to  be  re-elected  ;  and  defeat,  for  want  of 
offices  to  distribute,  is  to  him  political  annihila- 
tion. Neither  party  has  ever  taken  up  adminis- 
trative reform  as  a  caucus  measure;  an  individual 


86  jEssays  on  (Boveinmcnt. 


may  therefore  oppose  the  reform  without  losing 
his  political  standing.  No  party  leader  could 
hope  to  detach  a  few  votes  from  the  other  party, 
in  order  to  give  him  a  working  majority  in  favor 
of  a  telling  program  of  reform ;  and  therefore 
no  party  leader  has  made  the  reform  his  own. 
From  Congress,  then,  of  its  own  motion,  little  is 
to  be  expected.  Congressmen  will  be  nerved  to 
make  further  extensions  of  the  law,  and  to  vote 
appropriations,  if  they  believe  that  the  reform  is 
popular.  The  constitution  of  the  House  Com- 
mittee on  Civil  Service  Reform,  both  in  the  Fifty- 
first  Congress  (1889-91)  and  the  Fifty-second 
Congress  (1891-93),  is  therefore  encouraging,  since 
it  seems  to  show  that  both  parties  are  in  a  respect- 
ful mood  toward  the  reform  as  it  stands. 

The  reformers  are  not  satisfied  as  things  stand; 
they  wish  the  whole  business  of  the  government 
put  on  a  better  footing.  Here  come  in  certain 
neglected  peculiarities  of  the  American  system  of 
government,  for  which  no  person  can  be  held  re- 
sponsible, but  which  seriously  complicate  the  ques- 
tion of  an  advance  in  the  reform.  The  slogan  of 
the  reformers  is  "  Government  business  on  business 
principles ; "  but  nobody  save  the  Nationalists 
believes  that  the  government  can  conduct  its  busi- 
ness as  does  an  insurance  company,  or  a  railroad, 
or  a  bank.  In  the  first  place,  its  business  is  not 
done  for  a  profit ;  any  express  company  that 
should  undertake  to  carry  four-pound  packages  at 


Civil  Service  "Reform.  87 

the  same  rate  to  the  suburbs  of  New  York  and  to 
the  Crazy  Mountains,  would  find  it  necessary  to  re- 
organize its  system  of  appointments.  The  United 
States  Government  does  a  vast  variety  of  business. 
At  Washington  it  has  a  great  staff  of  administra- 
tive officers,  accountants,  clerks,  copyists,  and  ex- 
perts, all  easily  made  amenable  to  the  same  dis- 
cipline. In  the  cities  there  are  custom-houses  and 
post-offices  too  large  to  be  compared  even  with 
the  branches  of  great  English  joint-stock  banks. 
On  the  sparsely  settled  frontiers,  and  every- 
where throughout  the  country,  are  the  small  post- 
offices  with  inconsiderable  incomes.  In  the  foreign 
countries  are  the  legations  and  consulates,  with 
their  peculiar  functions.  It  is  evident  that  the 
same  system  of  selection  cannot  possibly  be  ap- 
plied to  all  these  branches  of  service.  Again,  the 
amount  of  government  business  is  prodigious.  In 
1790  the  population  was  4,000,000;  the  revenue, 
about  $3,000,000 ;  and  the  number  of  officials,  per- 
haps 2,000.  In  1830,  for  13,000,000  people,  50,000 
officials  collected  $25,000,000.  In  i860,  population, 
revenue,  and  officials  were  31,000,000,  $56,000,000, 
and,  perhaps,  80,000,  respectively.  In  1893  the  65,- 
000,000  people  will  raise  $400,000,000  through  the 
medium  of  perhaps  200,000  persons.  Indeed,  this 
vast  increase  of  business  is  one  of  the  principal  rea- 
sons for  a  reform.  The  government  has  long  since 
outgrown  its  shell,  and  abuses  of  little  account  in 
1830  will  be  fatal  if  not  checked  before  1930. 


88  jBeesL'QS  on  ©overnmcnt. 


The  great  variety  and  amount  of  government 
business    make    it  exceedingly  difficult    to  apply 
the  reformed   system  in  a  uniform  manner  to  all 
branches  of  the  service,  even  by  the  most  varied 
tests,  most  skilfully  applied.      It  is  not  very  hard 
to  convince  an  intelligent  man  that  some  better 
principle  of  selection  can  be  found  than  mere  po- 
litical influence.     But  the  problem  for  the  reform- 
ers is  to  set  forth  a  practical  system  for  the  minor 
appointments.     The  principle  of  competitive  ex- 
amination for  clerkships  may  be  considered  estab- 
lished ;    filling  the    higher   grades    by  promotion 
among  tried  subordinates,  seems  to  have  the  ap- 
proval  of  men  no  less   influential  than   the  Post- 
master-General and  the  President  of  the  United 
States.     The  present  efficient  and  untiring  Civil 
Service  Commission   may  be  depended   upon  to 
make  examinations  impartial,  and  to  make  them 
sensible.     The  real  cntx  of  civil  service  reform  is 
how  to  provide  for  the  country  postmasters,  who 
are  by  far  the  largest  class  of  federal  officials,  and 
who  come   most  closely  of  all  into  contact  with 
the  people.     To  leave  the  country  postmasters  to 
the  present  system   of  dictation   by  members  of 
Congress,  is  to  leave  the  reform  incomplete.    There 
is  no  constitutional  power  for  electing  postmasters 
or  any  other  national  officials  save  the  president, 
vice-president,    senators    and    members    of    the 
House  of  Representatives.     Examinations  or  other 
competitive  tests  can  hardly  be  applied  to  offices 


Ctvll  Service  Kefovm.  89 


having  emoluments  so  small,  and  for  which  the 
candidates  are  so  few.  The  country  post-ofifices 
must  almost  always  be  carried  on  by  people  who 
have  other  business,  and  carried  on  in  their  places 
of  business  ;  it  is  not  with  us  as  in  Germany,  where 
the  smallest  government  ofifice  brings  with  it  social 
prestige  and  a  special  title  of  respect,  and  where 
there  is  a  chance  of  transfer  and  promotion.  That 
this  difficult  problem  can  be  solved,  is  shown  by 
the  experience  of  England,  where  inspectors  rec- 
ommend such  appointments,  with  a  view  to  the 
greatest  convenience  to  the  community  ;  but  when 
shall  we  have  a  staff  of  inspectors  entirely  secure 
from  removal  if  they  recommend  a  man  who  does 
not  vote  with  the  party  in  power  ?  In  England, 
the  fact  that  the  telegraph  business  is  done  in  local 
post-offices,  makes  it  easier  to  furnish  employment 
suf^cient  to  take  the  whole  time  of  one  person. 

The  difificulties  that  we  have  just  been  discus- 
sing are  inherent  ;  they  would  exist  were  the  peo- 
ple at  large  heartily  interested  in  administrative 
reform.  They  are  more  serious  because  public 
opinion  is  apathetic.  In  the  first  place,  the  prin- 
ciple of  rotation  in  ofifice  is  firmly  fixed  in  the 
minds  of  the  American  people.  It  rules  the  choice 
of  legislators,  executive  officers,  and  judges;  it  ap- 
pears alike  in  federal,  state,  local,  and  municipal 
government.  When  the  Constitution  was  framed, 
in  1787,  it  adopted  the  principles  of  appointment 
and  removal   then   common  in  the  States  ;  brief 


90  Eseags  on  (Sovci-nmeut. 

legislative  terms,  but  re-elections  frequent ;  elected 
chief  executives ;  appoiitted  administrative  officers, 
with  unrestricted  tenure  ;  judges  appointed  for  life. 
As  the  suffrage  was  extended,  a  change  came  over 
the  States  ;  as  party  spirit  ran  high,  as  men  learned 
to  elbow  their  way  into  political  life,  re-elections 
grew  less  frequent.  In  1790,  sixty-four  percent, 
of  the  members  of  the  Connecticut  Legislature 
had  sat  in  it  before;  in  1889,  only  five  per  cent. 
Throughout  the  States,  heads  of  executive  depart- 
ments were  made  elective  ;  a  system  of  party  pro- 
scription of  all  appointive  offices  was  established. 
Even  the  judiciary  has  been  made  elective  in  most 
States.  Rotation,  rapid  rotation,  has  become  the 
accepted  principle  of  State  politics.  Where  State 
constitutions  set  barriers.  State  constitutions  have 
been  easily  amended. 

There  has  been  precisely  the  same  process  in  the 
United  States  Government,  so  far  as  it  could  go. 
Congressmen  are  less  and  less  certain  of  re-election. 
Since  Jackson,  no  appointed  official  could  be  sure  of 
his  place  longer  than  the  term  of  the  president  who 
appointed  him.  The  immense  difficulty  of  amend- 
ing the  federal  Constitution  has  been  the  sole  pro- 
tection of  the  judges.  To  only  one  other  class  of 
federal  officers  has  a  like  protection  been  accorded. 
The  experience  of  the  revolutionary  and  later  wars 
taught  the  people  that  the  army  and  navy  must 
have  trained  and  permanent  officers,  because  theirs 
is  a  highly  technical  profession  ;  they,  therefore, 


Clvd  Service  IRcfoim.  9^ 

are  by  law  entitled  to  a  trial  by  court-martial  be- 
fore dismissal. 

With  these  exceptions,  rotation  is  established 
as  the  principle  of  national  government.  Com- 
paratively few  congressmen  serve  beyond  two 
terms;  outside  the  classified  service,  few  officials 
see  the  seventh  year  of  government  employment. 
Taking  official  service  of  every  kind,  municipal, 
state,  and  national,  throughout  the  United  States, 
the  average  time  during  which  men  who  have  en- 
tered the  public  service  remain  in  public  life,  in 
any  capacity,  is  probably  not  four  years.  It  is 
evident,  therefore,  that  the  people  see  no  injury  to 
the  public  interests  in  frequent  changes  of  officers. 

There  is  a  feeling  that  public  offices  of  any  kind 
are  common  property  ;  that  the  right  to  hold 
them,  like  the  right  to  pre-empt  government  land, 
is  a  natural  incident  of  citizenship.  A  still  deeper 
reason  for  the  slow  growth  of  the  reform  is  the 
lack  of  confidence  in  expert  knowledge  of  every 
kind.  Self-confidence  is  a  part  of  the  heritage  of 
a  race  whose  traditions  are  those  of  frontier  life. 
The  average  man  likes  to  feel  that  he  can  do  any- 
thing, up  to  setting  a  tire  or  conducting  a  diplo- 
matic negotiation.  It  is  not  government  alone 
that  suffers  from  this  exaggerated  self-reliance;  in 
the  most  technical  professions  there  is  an  indispo- 
sition to  accept  the  results  of  concentrated  special 
study.  It  is  well  known  that  the  old  Capitol  at 
Washington  was  designed  by  a  physician   whose 


92  jEssags  on  ©oveinment. 

architectural  training  consisted  of  two  weeks' 
study  in  the  Philadelphia  Library.  Nevertheless, 
in  architecture,  engineering,  law,  medicine,  and 
kindred  professions,  it  is  coming  to  be  recognized 
that  a  careful  scientific  preparation  is  indispensable. 
But  in  more  occult  matters,  such  as  plumbing, 
alms-giving,  and  government,  the  people  still  work 
by  rule  of  thumb  ;  nobody  seems  to  consider  it 
unusual  that  the  New  York  Board  of  Electrical 
Control  has  not  one  member  who  is  an  electrician. 
Is  it  strange  that  most  men  deem  themselves  com- 
petent to  take  up  the  administration  of  a  post- 
office,  a  custom  house,  or  a  bureau  of  the  treasury  ? 

There  is  a  similar  want  of  clearness  about  the 
relations  of  officers  of  the  government  to  the  peo- 
ple. The  average  man  sees  no  essential  difference 
between  an  elective  officer,  an  executive  officer 
having  a  political  responsibility,  and  a  simple  ad- 
ministrative officer.  He  knows  that  the  first 
class,  the  elective  officers,  change  as  often  as  the 
sovereign  people  change  their  minds;  he  knows 
that  in  all  governments,  officers  who  help  to  carry 
out  the  political  policy  of  the  government  are 
changed  when  an  administration  changes;  why 
should  the  third  class  be  more  favored  ? 

Singularly  enough,  the  argument  that  frequent 
change,  with  the  consequent  loss  of  acquired  skill, 
is  costly,  has  very  little  weight  in  the  country 
at  large.  Americans  pay  the  price  for  the  best 
government,  and  accept  an  inferior  article.     The 


Cfvtl  Service  IRefonn.  93 

reformers  find  it  hard  to  bring  home  to  the  average 
man  the  truth  that  an  expensive  government 
causes  expense  to  him.  Ever  since  the  civil  war, 
"  the  government "  has  seemed  to  millions  of  peo- 
ple a  kind  of  productive  abstraction.  Indeed,  why- 
should  a  man  concern  himself  about  wastefulness 
in  federal  business,  when  he  sees  greater  wasteful- 
ness in  his  local  paving  and  street  cleaning  or 
school-house  construction  ?  Prodigality  of  govern- 
ment is  closely  connected  with  prodigality  in  pri- 
vate expenditure  ;  it  is  a  fault  of  a  country  rapidly 
growing  rich.  The  total  burden  of  federal  taxa- 
ation  is  but  $6  annually  for  each  person,  and  it  is 
so  levied  as  to  be  too  little  felt.  In  this,  as  in 
many  other  ways,  the  demoralizing  effect  of  a  sur- 
plus has  hindered  reform.  Again,  the  actual  cost 
of  the  federal  service  and  the  actual  number  of 
persons  employed  are  never  stated  to  the  people, 
and  in  fact  are  unknown  to  the  officers  of  govern- 
ment. Eventually,  as  population  increases  and 
virgin  soil  and  virgin  forests  are  exhausted,  the 
conditions  of  life  will  be  more  severe,  and  Ameri- 
cans will  feel  the  cost  of  government  as  they  do 
that  of  overcoats  or  of  butcher's  meat. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  government  service  is 
looked  upon  by  many  worthy  people  as  an  asylum 
for  the  unfortunate.  Much  of  the  public  indiffer- 
ence to  the  reform  is  due  to  a  culpable  good 
nature,  which  finds  it  easier  to  recommend  a  man 
to  the  government  than  to  give  him  private  em- 


94  JEgsa^s  on  Government, 


ployment.  It  is  rather  remarkable  that  this  sym- 
pathy with  the  unfortunate  does  not  extend  to  the 
present  holders  of  offices  and  their  dependent 
families.  There  seems  to  be  little  popular  feeling 
that  there  is  a  hardship  in  depriving  a  man  of  a 
place  in  which  he  has  made  himself  valuable,  and 
obliging  him  to  learn  a  new  calling. 

It  cannot  be  said  that  the  examination  system 
of  testing  candidates  for  appointment  is  a  popular 
system.  It  is  efficient,  is  approved  by  the  experi- 
ence of  other  countries,  and  is  the  only  system  at 
present  possible  which  secures  an  equal  chance  to 
every  qualified  citizen.  Still,  it  is  an  unfamiliar 
system,  little  used  in  private  business.  It  is  for 
this  reason  that  malicious  errors  about  examina- 
tion papers  and  questions  circulate,  and  are  doubt- 
less widely  accepted.  Any  one  may  disprove  the 
assertions  that  candidates  are  examined  in  the 
geography  of  China,  or  the  principles  of  quadratic 
equations,  by  turning  to  a  report  of  the  national 
Civil  Service  Commission  :  but  the  average  man 
uses  no  reports  save  those  of 

*'  Fama  malum  qua  non  aliud  velocius  ullum.''^ 

There  is  in  the  popular  mind  an  intimate  con- 
nection between  written  examinations  and  text- 
books, county  superintendents,  college  rushes,  and 
unpractical  professors.  Competitive  examination 
is  not  acclimated,  and  must  establish  itself  by  its 
own    success.     There    is   a    widespread  delusion, 


dlvil  Scvvtcc  IRefocm.  95 


also,  that  a  man  appointed  on  examination  cannot 
be  removed  for  incompetency. 

Even  were  the  impolicy  and  wastefulness  of  the 
usual  system  of  appointments  much  more  generally 
felt  than  they  now  are,  it  would  still  prevail; 
politics  is  to  many  minds  an  absorbing  sport,  pur- 
sued under  rules  and  limitations,  as  are  baseball  or 
boating.  The  hidden  work  of  politics — the  forma- 
tion of  combinations,  the  elaboration  of  "  slates," 
the  arrangement  of  "  deals " — is  a  pursuit.  To 
take  all  appointive  United  States  offices  out  of 
politics,  would  be  like  removing  the  championship 
among  league  baseball  teams  from  all  the  uncer- 
tainties of  contest.  It  is  of  course  an  exploded 
error  to  suppose  that  the  votes  fall  off  when  the 
spoils  are  no  part  of  the  prizes,  and  politicians 
begin  to  suspect  that  patronage  is  at  best  a  two- 
edged  weapon.  Nevertheless,  three-fourths  of 
the  gambling  element  in  politics — chance,  "  dark 
horses,"  "stuffed  "  ballot-boxes,  "bosses,"  and  po- 
litical "  deals  " — would  disappear  if  all  appoint- 
ments were  made  for  merit ;  and  a  great  many 
people  enjoy  the  gambling  element.  The  unfor- 
tunate connection  between  local  and  national  par- 
ties, so  clearly  pointed  out  by  Mr.  Bryce,  makes 
federal  offices  seem  an  essential  part  of  the  stakes 
in  state  and  municipal  contests.  In  a  word,  not 
only  parties  and  politicians,  but  a  great  number 
of  the  people,  like  the  "  fun  "  of  the  present  sys- 
tem. 


9^  jEssags  on  ©overnincnt. 

If  the  question  of  reform  could  be  separated 
from  all  others,  it  is  probable  that  a  decided  ma- 
jority in  its  favor  could  be  made  up  ;  for  the  spirit 
of  the  American  people  is  a  spirit  of  honesty, 
thrift,  and  fair  dealing.  Here  comes  in  the  influ- 
ence of  inertia.  It  took  thirty  years  to  bring  the 
slavery  conflict  to  a  crisis,  and  even  then  it  was 
not  the  abolitionist  who  provoked  it.  The  meth- 
od of  collecting  revenue  is  not  reformed;  the 
iniquities  and  inequalities  in  the  tariff  are  not 
corrected  ;  why  should  a  cold,  unimpassioned  re- 
form like  that  of  the  civil  service,  with  no  sectional 
representatives  to  blow  the  coals,  no  special  inter- 
ests to  make  their  plea,  expect  to  proceed  more 
swiftly?  The  present  policy  of  the  reformers  in 
urging  one  small  step  after  another,  is  very  prom- 
ising ;  for  every  improvement  of  the  law,  every 
extension  of  the  rules,  brings  political  inertia  to 
bear  in  favor  of  the  reform.  The  present  law  is 
narrow,  is  imperfect,  and  is  but  permissive  upon 
the  president ;  for  that  very  reason  infractions  are 
more  seriously  felt. 

What,  then,  is  the  conclusion  to  be  drawn  ?  Do 
the  people  wish  administrative  reform  ?  Yes,  they 
wish  it;  but  very  much  as  they  wish  virtue  and 
the  rights  of  man.  They  wish  the  reform  brought 
about,  but  brought  about  by  somebody  else,  with- 
out responsibility  on  them  or  on  their  legislators. 
On  the  other  hand,  they  make  it  clear  to  their 
representatives  and   to  the  political  parties,  that 


Civil  Service  IRetonn.  97 

the  reform  is  not  a  thing  that  is  safe  to  oppose. 
The  people  wish  the  executive  to  enforce  it  impar- 
tially. They  wish  the  Civil  Service  Commission 
to  show  pluck  ;  and  the  vigorous  action  of  the 
commission,  wherever  it  finds  evasion  of  the  law, 
will  have  the  hearty  approval  of  public  sentiment. 
There  is  at  least  an  uneasy  feeling  that  the  present 
system  is  a  poor  system.  The  unwearied  efforts 
of  reformers  to  arouse  public  sentiment  on  this 
subject  have  been  slow  but  powerful  influences  in 
moulding  popular  feeling.  The  reform,  therefore, 
seems  likely  slowly  to  advance.  It  can  never  be 
complete  until  the  sovereign  people  forget  that 
there  is  any  other  ground  for  appointment  to 
clerical  office,  state,  municipal,  or  national,  save 
merit,  ascertained  by  some  impartial  test. 
7 


V. 

THE   CHILEAN   CONTROVERSY. 

A  STUDY  OF  AMERICAN  INTERNATIONAL  POLITICS. 


When,  on  September  25,  1887,  a  frontier  guard, 
by  a  discharge  across  the  boundary  between  Ger- 
many and  France,  killed  a  French  subject, 
Boiguen,  Europe  was  aghast.  Behind  the  inci- 
dent, in  itself  of  little  importance,  stood  the  pride, 
hatred,  and  resentment  of  the  two  most  powerful 
military  states  of  the  world.  Millions  of  men 
stood  ready  to  move  at  a  day's  notice  ;  the  credit 
of  nations  fell ;  diplomats  and  generals  conferred  ; 
a  war  of  vast  proportions  and  incalculable  conse- 
quences seemed  at  hand.  Cooler  counsels  pre- 
vailed ;  the  German  government  disclaimed  re- 
sponsibility and  expressed  regret ;  and  the  world 
slowly  subsided  into  peace. 

We  in  America  self-complacently  congratulated 
ourselves  that  we  were  exposed  to  no  such  alarms ; 
that  wars  and  the  rumors  of  wars  were  far  from 
our  borders ;  that  we  had  no  great  standing  army, 
and  were  opposed  by   none  ;  that  peace  was  our 

(98) 


Zlic  Chilean  Contiovciss.  99 


portion,  and  a  latent  but  dignified  strength  the 
protection  of  the  nation  against  aggressions  ;  that 
we  neither  gave  offence  to  our  neighbors  nor  feared 
offence  at  their  hands. 

On  October  i6,  1891,  a  party  of  more  than  a  hun- 
dred sailors  from  the  United  States  ship  of  war 
Baltimore  went  ashore  in  the  Chilean  port  of  Val- 
paraiso. A  few  hours  later  a  riot  arose,  and  two  of 
them  were  killed  and  eighteen  wounded.  Sud- 
denly the  same  excitement  fell  upon  us  as  had 
fallen  on  the  French  in  1887.  A  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars'  worth  of  telegrams  passed  to  and 
from  our  minister  in  Chile ;  the  press  teemed  with 
an  evanescent  but  angry  war-talk  ;  naval  prepara- 
tions were  made.  After  three  months  of  this  agita- 
tion the  President  of  the  United  States,  in  an  of- 
ficial message,  laid  upon  Congress  the  responsibil- 
ity of  deciding  whether  there  were  not  cause  for 
war.  The  next  day  an  apology  was  made  by 
Chile,  and  the  matter  quickly  gave  way  in  the 
public  interest  to  the  question  whether  a  "  blue- 
nose  "  skipper  should  f\y  the  flag  of  his  country  in 
American  waters. 

The  Chilean  question  has  therefore  ceased  to 
exist,  and  it  is  not  worth  while  to  discuss  its  de- 
tails, or  to  try  to  apportion  the  responsibility  in 
exact  measure  between  the  two  governments  and 
their  respective  officials.  But  the  real  issue  in 
the  whole  matter  is  not  the  Chilean  question  ;  it 
is  the  American  question.     Whether  Chile  was  or 


loo  jEsea^s  en  Government. 


was  not  belligerent,  dilatory,  and  obstinate  is  now 
a  matter  which  chiefly  affects  the  Chileans  and 
their  government.  What  it  concerns  us  to  know 
is  whether  the  United  States  has  taken  up  a  new 
position  toward  our  American  neighbors ;  whether 
any  new  principle  has  been  introduced  into 
American  affairs ;  whether  the  United  States  is  to 
join  the  assemblage  of  the  world's  great  powers, 
and  to  take  part  in  general  international  disputes. 

The  purpose  of  this  essay  is,  therefore,  to 
take  up  the  relations  of  the  United  States  with 
Chile  in  1891-92  as  a  study  in  international  poli- 
tics, using  the  incidents  of  the  controversy  as 
types  of  certain  tendencies  of  our  national  policy. 
This  is  in  no  sense  a  party  question ;  there  is  noth- 
ing in  the  attitude  of  the  administration  to  show 
that  a  different  party  would  have  followed  a  dif- 
ferent policy.  It  is  not  a  question  of  individual 
statesmen  :  we  may  differ  from  the  views  of  the 
President  and  Secretary  of  State,  but  no  candid  ob- 
server will  deny  their  intention  of  promoting  the  in- 
terests of  the  United  States,  as  they  saw  them.  It 
is  simply  a  question  of  what  kind  of  public  policy 
will  make  our  country  strongest  and  most  influen- 
tial, within  and  without. 

The  discussion  of  such  a  question  is  the  right 
of  every  loyal  American.  There  is  a  school  of 
political  thinkers  who  hold  that  criticism  of  one's 
country,  or  the  policy  of  one's  country,  is  like 
open  criticism  of  a  mother  by  her  children.     Such 


^be  Cbdean  Controversy:'-,.' ;'',,'     iQi*, ': 

'-   '   ■  ■    ■   ^ ^^'  ; 

a  principle  may  answer  in  a"  co-Jfitfy  liks  Gef--, .' ,' 
many,  the  ruler  of  which  avows  to  his  military 
subjects  that  he  is  their  "  war-lord,"  and  that  they 
must  shoot  down  their  brothers  at  his  command. 
We  are  not  sons  of  our  country ;  we  are  our 
country.  Republican  government  is  a  political 
joint-stock  company,  in  which  every  citizen  is  a 
member,  with  a  fundamental  right  to  object,  but 
not  to  disobey.  He  may  protest  at  the  assess- 
ments levied  upon  him.  provided  he  pays  them  ; 
he  may  object  to  opening  up  new  foreign  connec- 
tions, provided  he  submits  when  they  are  opened 
up.  As  the  most  useful  graduates  of  a  college  are 
sometimes  those  who  point  out  faults  in  its  ad- 
ministration, and  the  most  useful  members  of  a 
party  are  often  those  who  protest  against  bad 
leaders,  so  it  is  no  mark  of  lack  of  patriotism  to 
inquire  whether  our  beloved  country — which  we 
all  believe  to  be  the  best  in  the  world — is  applying 
to  other  nations  the  principles  which  we  expect  to 
see  applied  to  ourselves. 

The  two  parties  to  the  Chilean  controversy, 
though  very  different  in  power,  have  many  com- 
mon characteristics.  Like  the  American  colonies, 
the  Chileans  in  colonial  times  were  less  subject 
to  the  control  of  the  mother  country  than  their 
neighbors.  Like  the  United  States,  they  achieved 
their  independence  early,  and  have  since  main- 
tained the  most  vigorous  and  least  disturbed  of 
all  the  Latin-American  £rovernments.     A  decided 


i02  i£sen^s  on  Government. 

p're'fei'e'hce  for  republican  institutions,  as  they  un- 
derstand them,  again  connects  the  two  countries. 
In  addition  to  their  Spanish  strain,  which  is  the 
main  European  stock  in  Chile,  flourishing  grafts 
of  English  and  x\merican  blood  are  evident  in  the 
names  of  several  of  the  Chilean  public  men :  among 
them  are  Admiral  Lynch,  Judge  Foster,  who  made 
the  investigation  into  the  Baltimore  affair,  and 
Ricardo  L.  Trumbull,  unofficial  envoy  to  the 
United  States,  and  a  descendant  of  that  Jonathan 
Trumbull  who  was  the  original  Brother  Jonathan. 
The  Chileans  have  been  a  progressive  people,  im- 
proving their  resources,  showing  keen  commercial 
ability,  and  known  in  the  shipping  trade  as  the 
"  Yankees  of  South  America."  This  enterprising 
spirit  has  taken  the  form  of  territorial  growth.  In 
i88i  Chile  secured  a  confirmation  of  claims  to 
Western  Patagonia,  and  in  the  same  year  forced 
Peru  to  cede  a  strip  of  desert  on  the  border  of  the 
two  countries,  formerly  the  Peruvian  province  of 
Atacama.  The  region  is  one  of  the  most  arid  on 
the  face  of  the  earth.  It  is  so  utterly  desolate  and 
devoid  of  streams  that  there  is  a  story  of  a  Peru- 
vian admiral  who,  during  the  war,  found  that  the 
guns  of  his  ships  commanded  on  shore  the  con- 
denser with  which  an  invading  Chilean  army  was 
procuring  the  water  necessary  for  its  onward  march. 
A  few  shots  might  have  destroyed  it.  The  Peru- 
vian declared  that  he  could  fight  men,  but  not 
leave  them  to  die  of  thirst ;  and  so  he  steamed 


Q:be  Cf3(lean  Coiiti-oversg.  103 

away.  Within  that  desolate  region  lies  one  of  the 
great  treasures  of  the  earth — a  nitrate  deposit  of 
almost  inexhaustible  extent,  awaiting  only  the  ap- 
plication of  sufficient  capital  to  enrich  the  country 
which  owns  it.  In  this  great  mass  of  "  portable 
property  "  lies  one  of  the  obscure  sources  of  the 
Chilean  war,  and  perhaps  of  American  firmness. 
The  two  parties  to  the  civil  war  in  Chile  were 
each  connected  with  a  syndicate  of  capitalists  for 
the  development  of  the  nitrate  beds,  and  if  war 
had  broken  out  between  the  United  States  and 
Chile,  the  nitrate  beds  might  have  eventually  be- 
come security  for  an  indemnity. 

In  situation  and  in  population  the  two  countries 
are  very  different.  Chile  occupies  the  razor-edge 
of  the  Andes,  a  long  narrow  strip  hemmed  in  be- 
tween the  ocean  and  the  mountains.  Her  area  of 
three  hundred  thousand  square  miles  is  but  one- 
eleventh  that  of  the  United  States.  Her  popu- 
lation of  two  millions  seven  hundred  thousand 
is  hardly  one-twenty-fourth  as  great  as  our  own. 
The  direct  trade  between  the  two  countries  is 
small — only  about  five  million  dollars  a  year,  in- 
cluding exports  and  imports;  and  the  opportuni- 
ties of  conflict  between  the  nations  seemed  in  1890 
as  far  away  as  the  causes  of  that  war  which  the 
French  peasants  informed  Hamerton  was  about 
to  break  out  "  between  Italy  and  Lapland." 

That  a  conflict  arose  is  due  in  part  to  changes  in 
the  United  States,  in  part  to  changes  in  Chile,  in 


104  Bssags  on  Government. 

part  to  the  personal  character  and  influence  upon 
each  other  of  the  statesmen  of  the  two  countries. 
It  is  now  ahnost  fifty  years  since  the  United 
States  began  to  appear  as  the  arbiter  of  affairs 
in  the  Western  world.  The  Monroe  Doctrine  of 
1823  was,  to  be  sure,  only  an  announcement  of 
"hands  off"  to  other  nations.  With  the  intrigues 
for  the  annexation  of  Texas  and  then  of  Califor- 
nia, from  1836  to  1846,  begins  the  tendency  to 
consider  the  Latin-American  countries  of  North 
and  South  America  as  a  field  for  American  diplo- 
macy. Attempts  were  made  to  annex  Cuba,  to 
support  expeditions  for  the  conquest  of  parts  of 
Central  America,  and  to  secure  a  canal  site  across 
the  Isthmus.  In  1865  the  French  were  warned 
out  of  Mexico,  and  they  obeyed.  During  the  last 
quarter  century,  however,  as  the  Latin-American 
peoples  have  gained  strength  and  steadiness,  our 
policy  has  been  to  attract  them  by  peaceful  means, 
by  offering  them  privileges  of  trade,  by  opening 
up  communication  with  them.  President  Arthur 
sent  a  Commission  to  report  on  the  best  means  of 
entering  into  relations  with  them  ;  the  Fifty-first 
Congress,  1889-91,  offered  a  reciprocity  scheme 
and  provided  for  subsidizing  steamer  lines  to 
reach  them.  In  1890  a  Pan-American  Congress 
was  held  in  Washington  to  further  the  growing 
relations  of  trade  and  friendship.  To  this  general 
policy  there  have  been  but  two  exceptions :  in 
t88i  the  United  States  came  into  diplomatic  col- 


XLbc  Cblleau  Coiitiovcrsg.  105 


lision  with  Chile;  in  1891  Chile  came  into  diplo- 
matic collision  with  the  United  States. 

These  two  Chiles  were  not  precisely  the  same. 
In  1 88 1  that  country  was  flushed  with  the  success 
of  a  fierce  war  against  Peru,  in  which  the  latter 
nation  was  abjectly  defeated  and  placed  at  the 
mercy  of  Chile.  Acting,  doubtless,  under  a  nat- 
ural feeling  of  sympathy  with  a  distressed  peo- 
ple. President  Garfield  consented  that  the  United 
States  should  step  in  as  mediator.  His  long  and 
fatal  illness  gave  to  his  Secretary  of  State,  Mr. 
Blaine,  unusual  power,  and  he  instructed  our  Min- 
ister to  Peru,  Mr.  Hurlburt,  to  protest  against 
annexation  of  Peruvian  territory  by  Chile.  The 
communication  was  complicated  by  the  assertion 
of  the  United  States  that  a  large  claim  based  on 
nitrate  discoveries  ought  to  be  provided  for  by 
Chile.  The  protest  was  ineffectual,  and  before 
the  United  States  could  press  the  point  further, 
President  Arthur  had  appointed  a  new  Secretary 
of  State,  Mr.  Frelinghuysen,  who  reversed  the 
previous  policy  and  permitted  the  Chileans  to 
dictate  the  terms  of  a  treaty  to  Peru — and  very 
harsh  and  brutal  terms  they  were.  The  Chileans 
went  on  with  their  own  internal  affairs.  As  the 
supremacy  of  their  navy  had  led  to  their  victory 
over  Peru,  they  built  several  new  war  vessels, 
among  them  the  fast  protected  cruiser  Esmeralda, 
at  one  time  the  best  vessel  of  her  class  in  the 
world.     They  continued   as  a  republic,  but   a  re- 


io6  iBesn^e  on  (Bovernmcnt. 


public   rather  in  the  mediaeval  than  the   modern 
sense.     Although  in  form  the  government  is  like 
that  of  the  United  States — leaving  out  the  Fed- 
eral features— the  political  affairs  of  the  country 
are  in  the  hands  of  a  comparatively  small  number 
of  men  of  wealth   and  station.      The  number  of 
votes  for  President  is  usually  about  two  per  cent, 
of  the  population,  against  about  eighteen  per  cent, 
in  the  United  States.     In  1890  there  came  about  a 
division  in  the  ruling  class.     The  President,  Bal- 
maceda,  was  opposed  by  a  combination  which  had 
a  majority  in  Congress,  and  was  determined  that 
none  of  his  adherents  should  be  elected  President 
to  succeed  him.     They  cut  off  the  appropriations; 
he  raised  money  in  defiance  of  them.     The  result 
was  an  appeal  to  arms  by  the  Congressional  party 
in    January,    1891,    and    a   consequent   civil    war. 
The  navy  sided   with   the   Congressionalists,  the 
army  with    Balmaceda.     For   many  months   the 
contest   was  doubtful ;    but   in  the  end  the  Con- 
gressionalists were  victorious,  thanks  to  their  abil- 
ity, by  means  of  their  fleet,  to  place  a  little  army 
anywhere  on  the  coast,  and  to  the  preference  of 
the  majority  of  the  Chileans  for  their  cause.     They 
captured   Santiago,  the  capital,  August  30,  1891, 
and  thus  established  their  claim  to  be  recognized 
as  the  Government  of  Chile. 

The  three  chief  actors  in  that  part  of  the  drama 
which  concerns  the  United  States  were  the  Presi- 
dent  of  the  Chilean   Republic,  the  Secretary  of 


Zbc  Cbilcan  Controversy.  ^°7 


State  in  the  United  States,  and  the  Minister  of 
the  United  States,  first  to  the  Bahnacedan  and 
then  to  the  restored  Chilean  government.  Mr. 
James  G.  Blaine  was  a  statesman  of  great  public 
experience,  and  his  somewhat  ardent  temperament 
was  in  1891  much  moderated  by  experience.  His 
favorite  policy,  since  he  came  into  office  in  1889, 
had  been  to  cultivate  friendly  relations  with  our 
Latin-American  neighbors.  Of  the  three  men  he 
showed  throughout  most  calmness  and  good  tem- 
per, and,  so  far  as  appears  in  the  published  corre- 
spondence, he  manifested  dignity  without  haste. 
President  Balmaceda  was  a  man  of  a  type  famil- 
iar in  Latin-America  ;  unscrupulous,  cruel,  deter- 
mined, able,  a  would-be  dictator.  Like  most  men 
of  his  class  he  had  obscure  relations  with  holders 
of  government  concessions,  and  he  probably  at- 
tempted to  bolster  himself  up  by  making  them 
liberal  promises.  In  despair  at  his  failure  and  in- 
ability to  escape,  after  the  collapse  of  his  govern- 
ment, he  committed  suicide,  September  30,  1891. 
Patrick  Egan  was  treasurer  of  the  Irish  Land 
League  in  Ireland,  and  left  the  country  hastily 
after  the  Phoenix  Park  murders  of  1882.  Those 
who  know  him  speak  well  of  his  character  and  his 
business  experience ;  and  no  connection  with  the 
murders  has  ever  been  traced  to  him.  The  ap- 
pointment of  Mr.  Egan  as  minister  to  Chile,  in 
1889,  was,  however,  upon  its  face  unsuitable  and 
impolitic.     He   was   a   very  recently  naturalized 


io8  Bssags  on  Government. 

citizen  of  the  United  States.  It  has  been  the 
practice  of  our  government  to  send  to  the  less  im- 
portant missions  obscure  men  of  little  or  no  pub- 
lic experience.  To  Chile,  however,  as  the  most 
promising  of  all  our  Southern  neighbors,  it  was 
especially  desirable  to  send  some  one  who  under- 
stood the  language  and  the  people,  and  whose 
station  at  home  was  such  as  to  make  his  appoint- 
ment a  compliment  to  the  nation  to  which  he  was 
accredited.  The  selection  of  Egan  was  particu- 
larly unfortunate  in  view  of  the  commercial  con- 
nections of  Chile  with  England,  which  was  cer- 
tain to  bring  him  into  unpleasant  controversies. 
Other  civilized  nations  send  ministers  who  may 
favorably  affect  the  people  among  whom  they  go ; 
the  United  States  alone  seems  to  suppose  that  a 
minister  who  is  popular  in  the  country  to  which 
he  is  accredited,  must  gain  that  popularity  by  be- 
traying the  interests  of  his  own  country.  Espe- 
cially is  this  true  of  the  Minister  to  England.  Mr. 
James  Russell  Lowell  was  accused  of  un-American- 
ism,  because  he  was  in  a  position  to  serve  his  coun- 
try well  ;  and  Mr.  E.  J.  Phelps  is  believed  to  have 
failed  of  the  appointment  of  Chief  Justice  because 
he  had  been  acceptable  to  Great  Britain.  Notwith- 
standing these  drawbacks,  Mr.  Egan  was  favorably 
received  by  the  Balmaceda  government.  When  the 
tide  changed,  and  he  was  left  to  represent  us  to  the 
Congressional  government,  difificulty  began,  and  he 
became  the  central  point  of  the  whole  controversy. 


Mr.  Egan's  first  mistake  was  that,  while  show- 
ing courtesies  to  both  parties,  he  plainly  sympa- 
thized with  Balmaceda  and  expected  his  triumph. 
In  this  he  was  supported  by  the  unofficial  and  offi- 
cial influence  of  the  United  States.  An  English 
correspondent,  a  partisan  of  Balmaceda,  says  that 
"  the  Americans  had  .  .  .  stood  almost  alone 
in  evincing  sympathy  with  the  cause  of  the  Presi- 
dent," and  that  he  found  "  the  officers  [of  the  Balti- 
more], from  the  captain  downward,  very  distinctly 
partisans  of  the  government.  They  regarded  the 
alleged  causes  of  the  revolution  as  mere  flimsy 
pretexts."  This  impression  was  reflected  to  the 
United  States.  It  was,  of  course,  right  to  con- 
tinue relations  with  Balmaceda,  who  held  the 
capital  and  chief  port  and  controlled  the  army. 
When  envoys  of  the  Congressional  party  appeared 
in  Washington,  the  government  very  properly  re- 
fused to  recognize  them  as  representatives  of  an 
independent  nation,  and  declared  that  it  "  feels 
bound  to  maintain  its  attitude  of  impartial  for- 
bearance." In  his  message  of  January  25,  1892, 
President  Harrison  says,  with  justice  :  "  The  con- 
duct of  this  government  during  the  war  in  Chile 
pursued  those  lines  of  international  duty  which 
we  had  so  strongly  insisted  upon  on  the  part  of 
other  nations  when  this  country  was  in  the  throes 
of  a  civil  conflict.  We  continued  the  established 
diplomatic  relations  with  the  government  in  power 
until  it  was  overthrown,  and  promptly  and  cor- 


no  lEesass  on  ©overnmcnt. 


dially  recognized   the   new  government  when    it 
was  established." 

There  was,  nevertheless,  an  undercurrent  of  feel- 
ing in  official  circles  and  in  the  press  that  the  Con- 
gressionalists  were  opposing  the  "  man  of  destiny," 
and  that  their  defeat  was  to  be  desired.  This 
feeling  rose  to  great  excitement  when  it  was  an- 
nounced that  the  Itata,  a  merchant  steamer  char- 
tered by  the  Congressional ists,  on  May  5,  1891, 
had  slipped  out  of  a  California  port  with  arms 
on  board.  It  was  a  doubtful  point  whether  the 
arms  might  not  have  been  sent  in  the  most  open 
manner,  without  furnishing  cause  of  complaint 
from  the  Chilean  government.  It  was  as  certain 
as  points  of  international  law  can  be,  that  the  Itata 
and  her  crew  could  be  dealt  with  only  if  they  again 
entered  an  American  port  ;  but  a  United  States 
cruiser  was  sent  in  chase,  and  the  Congressional- 
ists  were  glad  to  give  up  the  arms  rather  than  to 
incur  further  ill-will  from  the  United  States.  A 
decision  of  the  United  States  courts  has  since 
been  rendered  to  the  effect  that  there  was  no 
ground  for  detaining  the  Itata. 

As  the  struggle  went  on,  two  other  incidents 
showed  an  unfriendly  spirit  toward  the  Congres- 
sional party.  The  telegraph  cable  which  formed 
the  northward  connection  from  Valparaiso,  and 
which  was  of  great  importance  to  Balmaceda  as  a 
means  of  connection  with  the  United  States  and 
Europe,  landed  at  Iquique  and  then  went  on  north- 


Cbc  Cbdcan  Contiovcres.  i ' ' 

ward.  It  was  the  property  of  a  company  char- 
tered in  the  United  States.  Iquique  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  Congrcssionalists,  who  thus  con- 
trolled the  connection.  On  Mr.  Egan's  recom- 
mendation, the  United  States  gave  naval  protec- 
tion to  the  cable  company  while  they  cut  their 
cable  outside  Iquique  and  spliced  a  direct  off-shore 
connection.  The  right  appears  to  be  with  the 
cable  company,  but  the  Congrcssionalists  believed 
that  Egan  used  his  influence  with  the  home  gov- 
ernment to  secure  a  favor  for  Balmaceda. 

A  much  more  serious  incident  came  just  at  the 
end  of  the  war.  The  Congrcssionalists  felt  strong 
enough  to  land  an  army  and  march  on  Santiago. 
It  was  of  the  greatest  importance  to  them  to  make 
a  secret  and  unexpected  movement,  landing  either 
north  or  south  of  Valparaiso,  and  thus  eluding  the 
Balmacedist  army.  As  they  had  control  of  the 
sea,  there  was  no  possibility  of  the  Balmacedists 
watching  them  in  steamers.  On  August  20th 
it  was  rumored  in  Valparaiso  that  the  Congrcs- 
sionalists were  landing  in  Quintero  Bay,  some 
twenty  miles  north.  According  to  John  Trum- 
bull, then  in  Valparaiso,  the  United  States  cruiser 
San  Francisco  at  about  noon  steamed  out  of  the 
harbor  northward,  returning  about  five  o'clock.  A 
port  boat,  carrying  the  United  States  consul,  put 
out  to  the  ship  ;  as  soon  as  it  returned  it  was  an- 
■  nounced  that  eight  thousand  men  had  been  landed. 
Government  troops  were  at  once  forwarded  by  rail 


112  Bssags  on  <3ovcnimcnt. 


to  meet  the  invasion,  and  next  morning  the  gov- 
ernment organ  announced,  as  "  from  trustworthy- 
news  brought  by  the  United  States  war-ship  San 
Francisco,"  that  the  force  landed  was  such  as  to 
make  it  clear  that  it  was  not  a  feint,  and  that  the 
landing  party  would  not  be  re-embarked.  After 
Balmaceda's  fall  the  following  telegram  was  found 
among  his  papers  : 

Valparaiso,   Aug.  21,   1891,  9.36  a.m. 

Mr.  President — The  American  admiral  has 
left  me  only  this  moment,  and  he  believes,  as  I  do, 
that  a  re-embarkation  is  not  possible. 

[Signed]  ViEL. 

The  information  did  not  prevent  the  Congres- 
sionalists  from  taking  Santiago,  but  the  feeling  of 
soreness  left  in  their  minds  may  perhaps  be  made 
clearer  by  an  illustration.  When  the  expedition 
of  1862  was  sent  to  the  Gulf,  it  was  of  the  highest 
importance  to  the  Confederate  army  to  know 
whether  the  attack  was  to  be  on  Mobile  or  on 
New  Orleans.  If  a  British  ship  had  steamed  out 
from  Mobile  to  investigate,  and  on  her  return,  with 
or  without  the  officers'  knowledge  the  news  had 
been  circulated  that  the  fleet  had  entered  the  Mis- 
sissippi, what  would  our  government  have  done? 

To  this  damaging  charge  Admiral  Brown  has 
replied  what  we  must  believe  to  be  the  truth,  that 
he  gave  strict  orders  that  no  one  on  his  ship 
should    divulo-e    information.     His   error   was    in 


G^be  Cbilean  contioversg.  ii3 


supposing  that  such  information  could  be  kept 
under  such  circumstances;  he  put  himself  and  his 
ship's  company  in  a  position  to  favor  one  party 
over  the  other.  His  connection  with  the  Balma- 
cedist  official  may  'also  be  explained  without  re- 
flecting on  his  candor,  but  not  without  making 
the  United  States,  through  its  officers,  responsible 
for  the  breach  of  neutrality.  The  temper  of  the 
navy  was  later  shown  by  a  telegram  from  Com- 
mander Evans  of  the  Yorktown,  January  i6,  1892, 
addressed  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Navy  and 
through  him  made  public.  He  says  that  he  has 
"requested  the  American  Minister  to  state  to  the 
Minister  of  Foreign  AfTairs  that  I  am  responsible 
to  my  own  government,  and  not  to  that  of  Chile, 
in  such  matters,  and  that  I  consider  his  criticism 
offensive  and  will  not  accept  it ;  "  and  he  spoke  of 
the  conduct  of  the  Chilean  Minister  of  Foreign 
i\ffairs  as  "  unworthy  of  the  representative  of  a 
serious  government."  In  this  case  he  was  promptly 
disavowed  by  Secretary  Blaine ;  but  he  was  not 
reprimanded  by  his  official  superior,  Secretary 
Tracy,  of  the  Navy  Department. 

For  all  these  matters  Mr.  Egan  can  hardly  be 
held  responsible  ;  but,  throughout  the  period  of  the 
war,  the  Congressionalists  appear  to  have  looked 
upon  him  as  a  partisan  of  Balmaceda.  In  his  de- 
spatches Mr.  Egan  attempts  to  show  that  he  was 
trusted  by  Congressionalists,  inasmuch  as  they 
besought  his  good  offices  with  Balmaceda ;  it  is 
8 


iH  JEssags  on  ©cvciniucnt. 

equally  possible  that  they  applied  to  him  because 
they  knew  he  had  been  in  favor  with  the  dictator. 
It  appears  that  he  expressed  the  opinion  in  June, 
1 891,  to  an  American  naval  officer,  that  "  the  Gov- 
ernment at  Santiago  cannot  be  disturbed."  He 
was  the  agent — perhaps  simply  the  channel — -of 
various  impudent  requests  of  Balmaceda,  among 
them  one  for  the  purchase  of  a  man-of-war  from 
the  United  States  Government,  and  for  leave  to 
send  four  million  dollars  in  silver  to  Europe  in  an 
American  cruiser.  It  was  also  very  unfortunate 
that  Mr.  Egan's  son  was  made  agent  of  a  railroad 
company  which  has  a  claim  for  five  and  a  half  mill- 
ions against  the  Chilean  Government.  Of  course 
Mr.  Egan  supposed  that  he  was  dealing  with  a 
Government  which  would  soon  crush  out  the 
revolution  ;  but  he  must  take  the  responsibility  of 
thus  incurring  the  ill-will  of  the  Congressional 
party  when  it  came  into  power.  While,  therefore, 
there  is  no  published  evidence  of  a  failure  of  Mr. 
Egan  to  obey  instructions,  or  of  such  inexcus- 
able carelessness  as  that  of  Admiral  Brown,  it  is 
impossible  to  agree  with  President  Harrison  that 
"  the  history  of  this  period  discloses  no  act  on  the 
part  of  Mr.  Egan  unworthy  of  his  position  or  that 
could  justly  be  the  occasion  of  serious  animadver- 
sion or  criticism." 

In  considering  the  quarrel  with  Chile,  it  must  be 
kept  in  mind  that  there  were  three  very  distinct 
periods  of  diplomatic  relations  with  the  Chilean 


Government  :  first,  to  the  time  of  Balmaccda's 
overthrow,  August  30,  IcSqi  ;  then  with  the  recon- 
structed Government,  while  Senor  Matta  was 
Minister  of  Foreign  Affairs,  to  January  i,  1892; 
and  third,  with  the  same  Government  after  a  Cab- 
inet change,  under  the  Foreign  Secretaryship  of 
Pereira.  In  the  second  period,  with  one  impor- 
tant exception,  Mr.  Egan  seems  to  have  conducted 
himself  with  dignity  and  sense.  Their  representa- 
tive, Senor  Ricardo  S.  Trumbull,  says  that  the 
Congressionalists  were  too  busy  in  restoring  their 
Government,  and  too  glad  to  get  into  power,  to 
raise  difficulties  with  the  United  States  Minister. 
What  the  Chilean  Government  had  no  intention  of 
doing,  the  populace  of  Valparaiso  accomplished ; 
and  Chile  was  suddenly  altered  from  a  country 
with  a  grievance  against  the  United  States,  but 
ready  to  forget,  to  a  country  against  which  the 
United  States  had  a  grievance  which  it  would  not 
forget. 

October  16,  1891,  about  two  months  after  the 
overthrow  of  Balmaceda,  a  large  party  of  sailors 
on  shore  leave  from  the  United  States  ship  Balti- 
more was  assaulted  by  a  mob,  two  were  killed 
and  a  large  number — eighteen — wounded;  one 
Chilean  was  hurt.  Of  the  crew  of  the  Baltimore 
more  than  half  were  foreigners  ;  but  they  all  wore 
the  uniform,  and  were  entitled  to  the  protection 
of  their  government.  The  evidence  as  to  the  ori- 
gin and  conduct  of  that  riot  has   been  reviewed 


ii6  J6disa^s  on  Government. 

by  many  competent  tribunals :  by  the  Chilean 
courts  on  the  spot ;  by  Captain  Schley,  of  the 
United  States  Navy,  on  the  spot  ;  by  a  later  in- 
vestigation in  San  Francisco ;  by  the  newspaper 
press  all  over  the  country ;  and  finally,  in  an  elab- 
orate messasre  of  the  President  of  the  United 
States.  A  reading  of  the  correspondence  leaves 
little  reason  to  doubt  that  the  riot  was  inspired  by 
a  violent  prejudice  against  American  sailors  on  the 
part  of  the  lower  stratum  of  the  population.  There 
seems  no  evidence  that  it  was  the  result  of  an 
elaborate  plan.  There  is  no  evidence  that  the  po- 
lice participated — in  fact  they  put  an  end  to  the 
affair  with  no  gentle  hand  ;  and  many  of  the  sea- 
men were  roughly  hustled  ofi  to  jail,  as  the  Chileans 
assert,  to  keep  them  out  of  danger.  The  attack 
was  indefensible  and  cowardly,  and  plainly  re- 
quired the  Chilean  government  to  disavow  respon- 
sibility, to  punish  the  aggressors,  to  express  re- 
gret, and  to  promise  an  indemnity.  Unfortunately 
that  government  felt  itself  weak,  and  had  not  got 
over  the  sting  of  the  Itata  and  Ouintero  Bay  in- 
cidents. It  therefore  took  refuge  in  a  course  of 
diplomacy  very  like  that  of  Secretary  Blaine  in 
March,  1891,  when  some  Italian  prisoners  were 
lynched  in  a  prison  in  New  Orleans.  It  made  a 
non-committal  expression  of  regret,  declined  to 
take  responsibility  as  a  government  for  the  act  of 
a  mob,  and  promised  investigation.  In  this  whole 
matter,  so   far  as  appears  in   the  published  corre- 


Zbc  Cbilean  Contcoversg.  117 

spondence,  Mr.  Egan  behaved  with  coohiess  and 
circumspection.  The  government  in  Washington 
gave  him  some  discretion  in  phrasing  his  notes 
to  the  Chilean  government ;  but  he  appears  to 
have  confined  himself  throughout  to  almost  a  ver- 
bal transcript  of  his  instructions ;  and  there  is  not 
an  unbecoming  expression  in  this  part  of  his  cor- 
respondence. His  attitude  and  language  seems 
much  more  moderate  than  that  of  some  of  the 
newspaper  attacks  upon  him.  Chile  was  in  a  con- 
fused and  distressed  condition  ;  and  the  State  De- 
partment at  Washington  showed  a  corresponding 
forbearance.  An  expression  of  regret  for  the  at- 
tack was  at  once  demanded,  but  the  matter  was 
left  in  abeyance  till  the  tedious  process  of  the 
Chilean  courts  had  worn  itself  out.  In  a  word, 
the  Chileans,  like  all  weak  powers  engaged  in  dip- 
lomatic controversies  with  stronger,  desired  to 
gain  time ;  and  they  were  not  pressed  for  three 
months. 

Meanwhile  another  question  had  come  up  in 
which  Mr.  Egan  showed  less  discretion,  and  his 
government  supported  him  in  unreasonable 
claims.  During  the  war  several  of  the  Congres- 
sional ist  party  had  taken  refuge  in  the  American 
Legation,  which  had  sheltered  them  from  the  Bal- 
macedists.  The  privilege  depends  on  a  general 
principle  of  international  law,  but  a  principle  only 
applied  in  less  civilized  parts  of  the  world.  The  offi- 
cial residence  of  the  ministers  of  one  country  in 


ii8  Bssags  on  ©oveinincnt. 


the  country  to  which  he  is  accredited  is  always  con- 
sidered a  bit  of  his  home  territory  ;  neither  he  nor 
his  servants  may  there  be  molested,  nor  may  the 
officers  of  the  law  enter  it.  In  countries  like  the 
dependencies  of  Turkey,  Japan,  and  China,  Spain 
and  the  Latin-American  States,  fugitives  from  jus- 
tice are  usually  not  to  be  sheltered  in  the  embas- 
sies. To  this  rule  there  is  one  exception.  But 
even  this  exception  to  the  sanctity  of  the  ambas- 
sador's house  is  by  tacit  consent  given  up  in  the 
case  of  political  refugees.  Governments  rise  and 
fall  rapidly,  and  the  dictator  of  to-day  may  be  the 
outlaw  of  to-morrow.  The  privilege  is  not  sup- 
posed to  be  perpetual  :  the  fugitive  is  protected 
till  he  can  escape,  or  till  the  government  relents, 
or  till  his  party  comes  in  again.  In  this  manner 
Mr.  Egan  received  two  partisans  of  the  Congres- 
sionalist  party.  Under  this  privilege,  when  the 
crash  came,  he  received  Seiiora  Balmaceda  and 
about  sixty  other  persons.  Other  legations  did 
the  same :  Balmaceda  himself  was  for  a  time 
sheltered  by  the  Argentine  Minister. 

Party  spirit  was  now  unusually  exasperated  in 
Chile,  and  when  it  showed  no  signs  of  relenting, 
and  the  fugitives  still  remained,  the  government 
grew  uneasy  and  tried  various  expedients  for 
bringing  them  out.  Egan  was  importuned  to 
turn  them  out-of-doors,  and  very  properly  refused. 
Some  of  them  appear  to  have  been  indicted  for 
ordinary   crimes;  but    he   still    maintained,  as  he 


trbe  Cbilcan  Contvoversg.  119 

had  aright,  that  they  were  not  ordinary  criminals. 
An  attempt  was  made  to  impeach  some  of  them, 
but  this  was  equally  unavailing.  Meanwhile  the 
government  tried  blockading  the  house,  on  the 
ground  that  persons  were  constantly  in  communi- 
cation with  the  fugitives,  and  were  conspiring  from 
this  place  of  safety  against  the  government.  Mr. 
Egan  denied  the  conspiracy,  and  insisted  that  his 
residence  should  not  be  besieged.  His  govern- 
ment supported  his  position,  and  the  blockade 
was  raised.  The  house  was  still  watched  to  pre- 
vent escapes,  and  vexatious  incidents  kept  up  the 
ill-feeling  between  the  government  and  the  em- 
bassy. Foreign  Minister  Matta  wrote  despatches 
in  a  vein  so  discourteous  that  no  man  of  spirit 
could  bear  it,  and  Mr.  Egan  replied  sharply. 

So  far  our  Minister  must  stand  justified  ;  but 
he  now  advanced  another  doctrine,  which  was  in- 
defensible and  could  not  fail  to  be  offensive  :  he 
claimed  as  a  part  of  the  right  of  asylum  the  safe 
departure  of  the  refugees  out  of  the  country  ;  the 
aroma  of  United  States  territory  which  protected 
the  refugees  in  the  legation  was  also  to  waft  them 
through  the  seventy  miles  to  the  sea-coast  and  so 
upon  a  British  vessel.  In  a  despatch  of  October 
22,  1891,  Mr.  Egan  said  to  the  Chilean  Govern- 
ment: "There  cannot,  therefore,  be  cause  for  sur- 
prise on  the  part  of  your  Excellency  if  the  govern- 
ment of  the  United  States  should  interpret  as  an 
act  of  but  slight  courtesy  and  consideration,  that 


I20  Bseave  on  Government. 


the  Chilian  Government,  having  the  power  in  its 
»  hands  to  make  this  friendly  manifestation,  should 
not  wish  to  do  so,  in  accordance  with  the  respect 
due  to  the  invariable  practice  and  international 
policy  of  Chili."  This  laying  down  of  a  new 
principle  in  international  law,  for  it  was  not  the 
invariable  practice  and  international  policy  of 
Chile,  would  be  inexplicable  but  for  one  short  sen- 
tence in  Mr.  Egan's  letters  to  Secretary  Blaine : 
he  says  that  he  acted  strictly  in  the  spirit  of  the 
department  in  its  instructions  in  the  Barrundia 
case. 

The  title  of  a  recent  work  of  great  learning  and 
value  is  "  Digest  of  the  International  Law  of  the 
United  States."  If  there  be  such  a  thing  as  inter- 
national law  peculiar  to  one  country,  it  is  to  be 
found  in  the  Barrundia  case.  On  August  27, 
1890,  Barrundia,  a  criminal  fugitive  from  Guate- 
mala, was  a  passenger  on  an  American  merchant 
steamer  which  touched  at  a  Guatemalan  port. 
The  deck  of  a  merchant  vessel  is  in  all  civilized 
countries  simply  a  part  of  the  territory  in  which  it 
lies.  The  local  authorities,  therefore^  came  off  to 
capture  Barrundia,  he  resisted,  and  was  shot  and 
killed.  An  American  vessel  of  war  was  lying  near 
by,  and  its  deck  was,  under  international  law,  a 
bit  of  American  floating  territory ;  but  the  Com- 
mander, Reiter,  on  the  advice  of  the  American 
Minister,  declined  to  interfere.  Had  the  affair 
happened  in  Marseilles  and  had  he  interfered,  our 


^be  Cbilean  Controvei-sg.  121 


Government  would  have  apologized  or  there  would 
have  been  war.  Had  an  English  cruiser  interfered 
to  prevent  the  capture  of  an  American  on  board  an 
English  merchant  vessel  in  New  York  Harbor,  the 
commander  of  any  fort  would  have  been  justified 
in  turning  his  guns  on  the  man-of-war.  As  it 
was  the  territory  of  a  weak  Latin-American  State 
which  was  in  question,  the  officer  of  the  American 
ship  received  the  severest  naval  penalty  short  of 
cashiering.  The  principle  of  the  Barrundia  case 
is  simply,  that  American  ships  may  violate  the 
territorial  rights  of  weak  American  States  ;  and  it 
was  to  this  principle  that  Mr.  Egan  refers.  Sec- 
retary Blaine  does  not  appear  to  have  supported 
Mr.  Egan's  assertion  of  the  right  of  safe-conduct, 
but  approved  his  stand  in  protecting  the  refugees. 
Eventually,  rather  than  provoke  a  quarrel  on  the 
subject,  the  Chilean  Government  permitted  some 
of  the  refugees  to  leave  the  country,  and  on  Jan- 
uary 25,  1892,  it  was  announced  that  they  had 
reached  Callao  in  the  U.  S.  cruiser,  Yorktown. 

The  compliance  of  the  Chilean  Government  was 
not  because  it  accepted  the  Barrundia  principle, 
but  apparently  because  it  had  become  involved  in 
two  other  controversies,  in  each  of  which  it  had 
put  itself  in  the  wrong.  On  December  13,  1891, 
Seiior  Matta,  the  Chilean  Foreign  Minister,  irri- 
tated by  a  passage  in  President  Harrison's  message 
and  Secretary  Tracy's  accompanying  report  to 
Congress,  sent  out  a  circular  to  the  Chilean  am- 


122  fissags  on  (Boveinmeiit, 


bassadors  ;  it  was  published  in  the  Chilean  papers 
and  was  intended  to  be  a  defiance.  He  declared, 
"  that  the  statements  on  which  both  report  and 
message  are  based  are  erroneous  and  deliberately 
incorrect.  .  .  .  There  is,  moreover,  no  exact- 
ness or  sincerity  in  what  is  said  at  Washington." 
The  delay  in  the  investigation  of  the  Baltimore 
affair  was,  he  said,  "  owing  to  undue  pretensions 
and  refusals  of  Mr.  Egan  himself."  His  own  atti- 
tude "  has  never  been  one  of  aggressiveness,  nor 
will  it  ever  be  one  of  humiliation,  whatever  may 
be  or  has  been  said  at  Washington  by  those  who 
are  interested  in  justifying  their  conduct,  or  who 
are  blinded  by  erroneous  views.  .  .  .  We  feel 
confident  of  the  right,  the  dignity,  and  the  final 
success  of  Chile,  notwithstanding  the  intrigues 
which  proceed  from  so  low  [a  source]  and  the 
threats  which  came  from  so  high  [a  source]." 

It  was,  perhaps,  fortunate  for  Mr.  Egan  to  be 
thus  coupled  with  the  President  in  a  general  de- 
nunciation of  the  government  of  the  United  States. 
The  note  was  to  the  last  degree  insulting,  and 
would  have  justified  a  withdrawal  of  our  Minister 
and  a  severance  of  diplomatic  relations.  The  at- 
tempt was  made  later  to  set  up  the  claim  that  it 
was  a  "  domestic  communication  "  which  could 
not  be  the  subject  of  diplomatic  complaint.  Mr. 
Blaine  declined  to  accept  the  view  that  a  nation 
is  to  take  no  notice  of  an  insult  not  directly  com- 
municated, and   refused  to  receive  as  a  sufificient 


tTbe  Cbilean  Contioversi2.  123 


apology  a  statement  that  the  Chilean  Government 
would  strik-e  out  the  offensive  words. 

The  second  difficulty  was  caused  by  the  per- 
sistent delay  in  the  official  investigation  of  the 
Baltimore  affair.  "  In  view  of  the  fact  that  the 
Government  of  Chile  was  still  provisional,"  saj's 
President  Harrison,  "  and  with  a  disposition  to  be 
forbearing  and  hopeful  of  a  friendly  termination," 
he  waited  for  the  report  of  the  Chilean  courts  ;  a 
preliminary  statement  of  the  result  was  not  re- 
ceived in  Washington  till  January  8,  1892  ;  indict- 
ments were  found  against  several  Chileans,  but 
the  court  appeared  to  gloss  over  the  real  cause  of 
the  trouble. 

In'  the  elaborate  review  of  the  difficulty  made 
in  his  message  of  January  25,  1892,  President 
Harrison  says  :  "  The  communications  of  the  Chil- 
ian Government  .  .  .  have  not  at  any  time 
taken  the  form  of  a  manly  and  satisfactory  expres- 
sion of  regret,  much  less  of  apology."  This  state- 
ment is  accurate  as  to  the  attitude  of  Chile  up 
to  the  end  of  Matta's  administration.  To  Mr. 
Egan's  protest  and  demand  for  an  apology,  phrased 
in  the  terms  of  his  instructions  on  October  26th, 
Senor  Matta  replied  on  October  28th,  with  a  de- 
fiant and  abusive  note.  The  assault  on  the  Balti- 
more was,  he  said,  "  deplorable  ;  "  but  he  appeared 
to  leave  it  to  others  to  deplore  it.  He  said  that 
Egan's  note,  "  emits  appreciation,  formulates  de- 
mands, and  advances  threats  that,  without  being 


124  JEssags  on  (Bovernment. 

cast  back  with  acrimony,  are  not  acceptable,  nor 
could  they  be  accepted  by  this  department,  neither 
in  the  present  case,  nor  in  any  other  of  the  like 
character  ;  "  and  he  roundly  asserted  the  incontesta- 
ble right  of  Chile  to  judge  of  the  Baltimore  affair 
in  her  own  courts  and  in  her  own  way.  Senor 
Montt,  the  new  Chilean  Minister  at  Washington, 
did  on  December  nth  speak  of  "  the  lamentable 
events  at  Valparaiso,  which  my  Government  had 
deeply  deplored  ; "  and  he  promised  "  that  if  Chil- 
ean citizens  were  guilty  they  should  be  punished." 
Yet  on  December  13th  was  issued  Senor  Matta's 
ofificial  circular,  which  has  already  been  discussed. 
When,  in  January,  the  Chilean  foreign  depart- 
ment passed  into  the  hands  of  Senor  Pereira, 
a  change  is  instantly  visible ;  on  January  4th 
Senor  Montt  at  Washington  of^cially  mentioned 
the  occurrence  which  "  Chile  has  lamented  and 
does  so  sincerely  lament."  Four  days  later  he 
announced  that  he  had  received  special  instruc- 
tions to  state  "that  the  Government  of  Chile  has 
felt  very  sincere  regret  for  the  unfortunate  events 
which  occurred  in  Valparaiso  on  the  i6th  of  Oc- 
tober ;  "  and  he  added  that  his  Government  "  cord- 
ially deplores  the  aforesaid  disturbance."  Minis- 
ter Montt  had  already  suggested  arbitration  as  a 
means  of  settling  the  dispute.  Surely  this  might 
have  been  accepted  as  the  apology  due  for  the  un- 
official attack  on  the  sailors  of  the  Baltimore,  leav- 
ing for  settlement  only  the  question  of  the  punish- 


Zhc  Cbilean  Controversy.  125 


ment  of  the  guilty,  and  an  indemnity  for  the  killed 
and  injured.  About  the  same  time  the  watch  over 
the  refugees  was  relaxed.  There  remained,  so  far 
as  the  Chileans  understood,  only  one  matter  to  be 
adjusted,  and  they  proceeded  to  make  amends  for 
that.  On  January  16th  the  Chilean  authorities 
notified  Mr.  Egan  that  they  would  withdraw  any 
offensive  passages  in  the  Matta  circular,  and  had 
instructed  their  Minister  in  Washington  to  ex- 
press regret.  The  apology,  thus  expressed  both  in 
Washington  and  Santiago,  was  stiff  and  ungrace- 
ful, perhaps  inadequate  ;  but  it  was  made  in  good 
faith.  On  January  20th,  evidently  feeling  that  all 
was  now  serene,  the  Chileans  ventured,  acting  on 
a  hint  of  Mr.  Blaine's,  to  ask  for  Egan's  with- 
drawal as  a  persona  non  grata. 

What,  therefore,  must  have  been  the  dismay  of 
the  Chileans  on  January  23d,  to  receive  an  official 
notice,  which  the  newspapers  dubbed  an  "  ulti- 
matum," containing  the  statement  that  the  United 
States  Government  was  not  satisfied  with  the 
result  of  the  judicial  investigation  at  Valparaiso 
and  still  asked  "  for  a  suitable  apology;"  that  for 
the  Matta  note  there  must  be  still  another  "suit- 
able apology,"  without  which  the  United  States 
would  terminate  diplomatic  relations  ;  and  that 
the  request  for  Mr.  Egan's  withdrawal  could  not 
at  that  time  be  considered. 

It  was  a  bitter  draught  for  any  government ; 
but   threats  of  war  were  resounding  through  the 


126  jEssage  on  ©overnnicnt. 

United  States ;  American  naval  vessels  were  hur- 
riedly being  made  ready;  coal  and  supplies  were 
going  into  the  Pacific.  There  was  power  behind 
the  note,  and  Chile  prepared  to  bend  to  the  storm. 
The  "  ultimatum  "  appears  to  have  reached  the 
Chileans  on  Saturday,  January  23d.  On  Mon- 
day, January  25th,  they  sent  an  answer  which 
could  not  possibly  be  read  as  anything  but  a  com- 
plete and  abject  apology  on  all  the  three  points. 

Mr.  Roosevelt  tells  us  that  during  his  legislative 
experience  in  Albany,  the  anti-Tammany  men  sent 
in  a  list  of  the  offices  which  they  claimed  as  their 
"ultimatum."  The  Tammany  men,  who  were 
good  diplomats  but  poor  Latinists,  responded  with 
what  they  called  an  "  ipse  dixit."  In  this  case, 
while  the  "  ultimatum  "  proceeded  from  the  State 
Department,  the  "  ipse  dixit  "  was  a  message  is- 
sued by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  on 
the  day  when  the  Chilean  answer  was  being  for- 
warded. It  rehearsed  the  whole  controversy  at 
great  length,  submitted  copious  correspondence, 
and  ended  with  the  significant  phrase  :  "  In  my 
opinion  I  ought  not  to  delay  longer  to  bring  these 
matters  to  the  attention  of  Congress  for  such 
action  as  may  be  deemed  appropriate." 

It  is  not  for  mortals  to  peer  into  the  secrets  of 
Olympus,  or  to  consider  the  influences  of  Secre- 
tary Neptune  of  the  Navy  Department,  or  of  Sec- 
retary Minerva,  the  stately  Goddess  of  diplomacy. 
Nor  are  the  materials  at  hand  to  verify  the  popu- 


Z\K  CDilcan  Controversy.  127 


lar  belief  that  President  Harrison  took  the  Chilean 
affair  out  of  the  hands  of  Secretary  Blaine,  and 
overruled  his  counsel.  It  is  an  unprofitable  con- 
troversy as  to  whether  the  authorities  in  Washing- 
ton knew  that  an  answer  was  on  its  way  :  if  they  had 
read  the  correspondence  they  knew  that  an  answer 
must  come,  and  that  the  Chilean  Ministry  must 
send  a  peaceful  answer.  It  is  therefore  difficult  to 
understand  the  purpose  of  the  President's  message. 
On  January  26th  the  Administration  became  at 
last  aware  that  its  effect  had  been  merely  to  deep- 
en the  humiliation  of  Chile.  For  the  Baltimore 
incident  Senor  Pereira  declared  that  "  he  does  not 
for  a  moment  hesitate  to  condemn  in  vigorous 
terms  the  act  committed  on  the  i6th  of  October, 
or  to  offer  such  reparation  as  is  just."  As  for  the 
Matta  note,  he  "  deplores  that  .  .  .  there  were 
employed  through  an  error  of  judgment  the  expres- 
sions which  are  offensive  in  the  judgment  of  your 
Government,"  and  "absolutely  withdraws  the  said 
expressions,"  As  to  Egan,  he  agreed  to  "  take  no 
positive  step  without  the  accord  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States."  It  is  related  of  a 
wily  Russian  diplomatist,  that  having  sent  in  an 
ultimatum  he  afterward  made  a  new  proposition 
as  an  "  ultimatissimum."  The  apology  seems  the 
ultimatissimum  of  humility.  Thus  the  matter 
ended.  The  United  States  carried  every  point 
and  conceded  but  one — the  disavowal  of  the  fiery 
note  of  Commander  Evans, 


128  j£s£;ai26  on  (Bovcinmcnt. 

This  summary  review  of  events  must  not  be  un- 
derstood to  ignore  the  substantial  grievances  of 
the  United  States.  Our  sailors  were  assaulted, 
apparently  because  they  were  our  sailors ;  inves- 
tigation was  delayed  a  quarter  of  a  year ;  Minis- 
ter Egan,  Secretary  Blaine,  and  President  Harrison 
were  all  treated  by  Senor  Matta  with  unbearable 
insolence.  These  were  all  things  demanding  an 
apology ;  failing  an  apology,  after  due  and  formal 
request,  the  proper  remedy  in  such  a  contest  with 
a  weak  nation  is  to  withdraw  our  ambassador.  It 
is  not  a  proper  remedy  to  threaten  war,  or  to  pre- 
pare to  spend  perhaps  two  thousand  lives  of  our 
own  subjects  in  order  to  hasten  reparation  for  the 
loss  of  two. 

It  is,  of  course,  unfair  to  hold  the  Administration 
responsible  for  the  foolish  and  vaporing  war  talk  of 
the  newspapers  ;  but  one  of  the  interesting  features 
of  the  whole  display  is  the  semi-publicity  of  deli- 
cate negotiations.  Both  the  Chilean  and  Ameri- 
can Governments  have  disregarded  the  funda- 
mental maxim  of  diplomacy — not  to  show  one's 
whole  hand  to  the  adversary.  Important  de- 
spatches, like  the  Matta  note,  have  been  given 
to  the  press.  Semi-official  interviews  have  been 
granted  to  reporters  and  published.  England  is 
held  to  be  at  a  disadvantage  as  against  other  Eu- 
ropean powers,  because  Parliament  may  at  any  time 
compel  ministers  to  state  the  progress  of  negotia- 
tions.    Our  President  is  wisely  armed  withdiscre- 


Zbc  Cbilean  Controversy.  129 


tion  to  withhold  information  even  from  Congress ; 
and  the  partial  statements  made  public  through 
irregular  channels  have  fed  rather  than  allayed 
the  excitement. 

Another  weak  spot  in  our  system  brought  out 
by  this  controversy  is  the  lack  of  harmony  be- 
tween executive  departments.  In  the  Bering  Sea 
question  a  few  years  ago,  Secretary  of  State 
Bayard  and  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  Manning, 
gave  contradictory  orders.  The  President  inter- 
fered and  established  a  policy.  In  the  Chilean 
affair  the  Secretary  of  State  and  Secretary  of  the 
Navy  seem  to  have  been  at  cross  -  purposes,  and 
the  President  did  not  straighten  the  matter  out. 
Plainly,  if  we  are  to  have  any  consistent  foreign 
policy  it  should  be  intrusted  to  the  Secretary  of 
State  to  administer,  and  the  army  and  navy  should 
be  subordinated.  Naval  commanders  are  highly 
educated  men,  but  they  are  soldiers;  the  com- 
mand of  a  powerful  ship  and  the  possession  of  a 
grievance  are  together  too  much  for  their  self- 
control  ;  they  must  be  placed  under  some  indis- 
putable authority,  or  we  shall  get  into  trouble  all 
over  the  world. 

The  controversy  further  illustrates  the  inconven- 
iences of  modern  civilization.  The  Pasha  of  INIany 
Tales  objected  to  the  art  of  writing  because,  he 
said,  when  a  man  paid  his  tax  he  had  to  give  him 
a  receipt ;  and  then  when  he  tried  to  collect  the 
tax  a  second  time,  he  was  confronted  by  that  pa- 


130  Bssags  on  ©ovenimcnt. 

per.  Many  times  must  Minister  Egan  have 
wished  that  the  Congressional ists  had  cut  the 
cable  at  Iquique.  Modern  diplomacy  puts  the 
Foreign  Minister  at  one  end  of  the  telephone,  and 
the  Secretary  of  State  at  the  other.  The  swift- 
ness of  communication  also  permits  quarrels  to 
roll  up  with  alarming  swiftness.  Under  the  old 
system  of  mail  connection  it  would  have  been 
morally  impossible  for  a  President  to  send  in  a 
hostile  message  on  the  day  when  the  mail  steamer 
was  expected  with  an  apology. 

The  effect  of  the  somewhat  theatrical  message  of 
President  Harrison  was  to  inflict  an  unnecessary 
humiliation  on  Chile.  Spanish-Americans  have 
good  memories.  Mexico  still  cherishes  resent- 
ment for  the  war  begun  against  her  forty-five  j^ears 
ago ;  and  forty  -  five  years  hence  the  Chileans 
are  likely  to  remember  the  Balmaceda  affair 
as  Americans  remembered  the  impressment  of 
American  seamen  by  Great  Britain.  We  have 
the  apology,  but  with  it  we  have  the  ill-will. 

Nor  is  the  ill-will  likely  to  be  confined  to  Chile. 
Peru  doubtless  rejoices  at  the  discomfiture  of  her 
old  enemy,  but  other  powers  are  likely  to  see  in  it 
a  reason  for  holding  aloof  from  the  United  States. 
We  are  in  danger  of  entering  into  the  bullying  pol- 
icy which  has  made  Great  Britain  unpopular  the 
world  over.  We  must  protect  our  ships,  our  men, 
our  flag,  and  the  honor  of  our  country  on  all  seas 
and  in  all  ports.     But  to  leave  out  of  account  the 


Zbc  Cbilcan  Contcoversg.  131 

pride  and  sensitiveness  of  the  Spanish  race,  in  mak- 
ing reclamations  and  exacting  apologies,  is  simply 
to  build  up  a  hostile  wall  round  about  us.  We 
are  not  so  powerful  that  we  can  afford  to  make 
unnecessary  enemies. 

More  important  than  all  the  rest  is  the  effect  of 
an  ill-considered  foreign  policy  on  our  own  politi- 
cal prosperity.  No  one  who  has  examined  the 
diplomacy  of  the  last  ten  years  can  fail  to  be 
struck  with  the  inclination  of  the  Government  to 
set  up  new  principles  of  international  law  which  are 
not  only  not  acknowledged  by  other  nations,  but 
which  are  likely  to  be  wrested  to  our  own  hurt. 
We  have  asserted  an  interest  in  Samoa  which 
gives  us  a  kind  of  a  protectorate  over  a  South  Sea 
Island  ;  for  many  years  we  strove  against  a  similar 
British  claim  in  Belize.  At  one  time  we  claimed 
Bering  Sea  as  our  territory,  forgetful  of  the  other 
seas  in  other  parts  of  the  world  which,  on  the 
same  principle,  may  be  closed  to  us.  We  have  as- 
serted that  an  American  ship  is  a  part  of  American 
territory ;  and  deny  that  the  same  principle  may 
be  applied  to  American  ships  in  foreign  ports. 
We  have  claimed  safe-conduct  for  refugees  in  our 
Latin  -  American  legations ;  it  is  impossible  to 
admit  a  corresponding  right  in  their  legations 
in  Washington.  The  fault  of  our  diplomacy  in 
the  Chilean  relations,  as  elsewhere,  is  a  strict  rat- 
ing of  our  own  rights  and  privileges  and  an  under- 
estimate of  those  of  other  powers.     Sixty-five  mill- 


132  B66as0  on  (Bovenimcnt. 

ions  of  people  with  a  powerful  navy  may  without 
personal  danger  ignore  commonly  received  princi- 
ples of  international  law.  But  in  the  end  we  have 
gained  petty  advantages,  made  unnecessary  ene- 
mies, and  put  weapons  into  the  hands  of  power- 
ful nations  to  use  against  us  in  the  future.  The 
United  States  is  established  as  the  arbiter  of  the 
Western  world  ;  our  dignity  does  not  require  so 
much  self-assertion  ;  as  Bryce  says,  "  We  do  not 
need  a  steam-hammer  to  crack  nuts." 


VI. 
THE   COLONIAL  TOWN   MEETING. 


"  At  a  Meeting  of  the  Freeholders  and  other  In- 
habitants of  the  Town  of  Boston  Duly  Qualified 
being  Regulerly  Assembled  in  A  Publick  Town 
Meeting  at  the  Town  House  in  Boston  on  Tues- 
day September  the  14"'  1731  : 

"  After  Prayer  by  the  Rev*  m""  John  Webb, 

"  Habijah  Savage  Esq'  was  Chose  to  be  Mod- 
erator for  this  Meeting 

"  Proposed  to  Consider  About  Reparing  m' 
Nathaniell  Williams  His  Kitchen  &c — 

"  In  Answer  to  the  Earnest  Desire  of  the  Hon- 
ourable House  of  Representatives — 

"  Voted  an  Intire  Satisfaction  in  the  Town  in 
the  late  Conduct  of  their  Representatives  in  En- 
deavoring to  preserue  their  Valuable  Priviledges, 
And  Pray  their  further  Endeavors  therein — 

"  Voted.  That  the  Afair  of  Repairing  of  the 
Wharff  leading  to  the  North  Battrey.  be  left 
with  the  Selectmen  to  do  therein  as  they  Judge 
best—" 

The  above  record  of  an  apparently  brief  and  un- 
eventful assembly  of  the  voters  of  Boston  is  an 
epitome  of  the  colonial  town  meeting.  The  legal 
forms  under  which  it  was  summoned  and  debate 

(133) 


134  jiE00as6  on  Government. 


went  on  were  usual  throughout  New  England. 
The  devout  opening  and  orderly  procedure  were 
characteristic  of  the  times  and  the  people.  The 
three  items  of  business  illustrate  the  triple  func- 
tions of  the  town  meeting  in  the  seventeenth 
and  eighteenth  centuries  :  it  acted  as  a  legislature 
of  the  town,  as  an  organ  for  the  expression  of 
opinions  on  matters  of  state,  and  as  an  electoral 
and  directing  assembly. 

Since  the  early  settlers  of  New  England  were  of 
about  the  same  degree  of  education  and  polit- 
ical experience  in  all  the  New  England  colonies, 
and  since  the  physical  and  ecclesiastical  condi- 
tions were  much  the  same,  towns  and  town  meet- 
ings bore  a  marked  similitude  to  each  other  in 
Plymouth,  Massachusetts,  New  Hampshire, 
Rhode  Island,  New  Haven,  and  Connecticut.  In 
one  colony  the  colonial  legislature  perhaps  inter- 
fered more,  in  another  less;  there  were  many  local 
variations ;  but  there  was  a  distinct  type  of  town 
meeting. 

At  first  the  town  meeting  was  held  as  often  as 
the  people  had  occasion  ;  but  the  frequent  meet- 
ings were  found  so  burdensome  that  selectmen 
were  soon  established  for  the  routine  business, 
and  the  town  assembled  only  three  or  four  times  a 
year;  "Town  Quarter  Day"  was  the  term  in 
Providence.  In  troubled  times  the  meetings  were 
held  more  frequently  ;  in  the  twelve  months  of 
1774-75  the  people  of  Boston  assembled  on  thirty- 


Colonial  <Io\vn  Meeting.  i35 

one  different  days,  besides  many  adjournments 
from  morning  to  afternoon.  Yet,  whatever  the 
exigency,  the  people  did  not  come  together  of 
their  own  motion  ;  an  elaborate  machinery  was 
provided,  partly  by  custom,  partly  by  law.  The 
selectmen  must  summon  a  meeting  on  the  request 
of  a  certain  number  of  voters  ;  if  they  neglected 
the  duty,  the  next  justice  of  the  peace  must  call 
it.  Two  attempts,  in  1688  and  1774,  by  law,  to 
prevent  the  summoning  of  town  meetings  in  Mas- 
sachusetts, were  alike  unsuccessful.  A  further 
preliminary  was  the  circulation  of  notice  by  the 
town  constable  by  personal  service  from  house  to 
house. 

Another  indispensable  preliminary  was  the 
"  warrant,"  or  list  of  subjects,  to  come  up  at  the 
ensuing  meeting.  It  was  headed  "  In  His  Maj- 
esty's Name  ;  "  and  by  town  rules,  later  enacted 
into  colonial  law,  no  question  could  be  brought 
before  the  meeting  which  was  not  stated  in  the 
list.  The  voters,  however,  had  not  the  present 
privilege  of  staying  away  from  a  meeting  if  they 
were  not  interested  in  the  subjects  to  come  up  ; 
town  votes  often  inflicted  a  fine  or  other  penalty 
on  absentees. 

Who  could  participate  in  the  meetings,  when 
duly  summoned  ?  Here  comes  in  one  of  those 
complications  which  make  colonial  institutions  so 
difficult  to  understand.  There  were  at  least  four 
different  kinds  of  town  meeting,  and  the  voters  in 


136  J£33ag6  on  (Bovcrunicnt. 

one  did  not  necessarily  have  the  suffrage  in  an- 
other. In  the  first  place  many  of  the  towns  were 
founded  by  a  sort  of  local  stock  company  called 
the  "  Proprietary."  The  members  or  proprietors 
originally  held  all  the  land  in  the  town,  and  in- 
deed made  up  the  body  of  settlers.  They  assigned 
tracts  of  land  to  themselves,  then  admitted  other 
persons  to  the  Proprietary,  and  then  sold  or 
granted  land  to  non- members,  who  had  no  share 
in  the  residue  of  the  undivided  lands.  The  pro- 
prietors were  summoned  by  warrant  to  meetings 
which  in  early  days  were  practically  town  meet- 
ings;  for  nearly  a  century  the  "  Hundred  Proprie- 
tors" of  Providence  and  the  rest  of  the  community 
were  at  loggerheads  over  these  special  privileges. 

A  second  kind  of  town  meeting  was  held  by 
those  inhabitants  who  were  freemen  of  the  colony. 
They  had  a  status  in  colonial  affairs  resembling 
that  of  the  proprietors  in  town  matters ;  they 
alone  in  the  beginning  could  take  part  in  the  affairs 
of  the  great  company,  the  colony  ;  as  that  body  de- 
veloped into  a  commonwealth,  they  were  the  only 
persons  possessed  of  full  colonial  citizenship,  and 
thus  were  the  only  voters  for  colonial  officers. 
Since  all  elections  must  be  held  in  town  meeting, 
special  meetings  were  summoned,  at  which  none 
but  the  freemen  appeared. 

The  third  and  more  common  sort  of  meeting 
was  for  the  transaction  of  ordinary  business,  and 
was  from  the  beginning  open  to  the  freemen  and 


Colonial  ^own  ^eetin^.  i37 

to  others  admitted  by  the  towns  to  local  citizen- 
ship. The  distinction  between  "  freemen "  and 
"  inhabitants  "  gradually  disappeared  in  local  mat- 
ters, so  that  any  grown  man,  born  or  naturalized 
in  the  colony,  might  acquire  the  suffrage,  provided 
he  had  the  property  qualification.  The  possession 
of  real  estate  or  of  a  very  considerable  personal  es- 
tate was  everywhere  a  requisite.  In  at  least  one 
case,  Boston  in  1740,  the  town  declared  the  pay- 
ment of  a  personal  tax  essential. 

The  fourth  sort  of  town  meeting,  in  which  jurors 
and  county  officers  were  chosen,  does  not  differ 
much  from  the  ordinary  meeting,  and  that  business 
was  usually  performed  at  the  ordinary  meeting. 

The  result  of  the  various  limitations  on  the  suf- 
frage was  that  the  persons  qualified  to  participate 
in  a  town  meeting  were  fewer  in  proportion  than 
at  present.  At  a  very  crowded  town  meeting  in 
Boston  in  1734  there  were  but  916  voters,  out  of 
a  population  of  about  15,000;  in  a  ward  of  the 
present  city  of  Boston  having  the  same  population 
the  vote  would  now  be  about  2,300.  So  long  as 
the  towns  possessed  the  right  to  admit  local 
voters,  they  often  exercised  it  by  preventing  peo- 
ple from  settling  among  them  and  thus  acquiring 
political  rights.  When  William  Lincoln  in  167 1 
tried  to  rent  a  farm  in  Lancaster  he  received  the 
following  notice  : 

"  In  his  maijesties  name  you  are  Required  to 
withdraw  yourselfe  and  family,  and  to  depart  the 


138  Bssags  on  ©ovenimcut. 

towne  forthwith,  in  Regard  the  towns  men  vterly 
disclames  you  an  inhabitant." 

Out  of  the  limited  number  of  persons  entitled 
to  participate  in  town  affairs,  those  who  were  able 
and  willing  to  attend  constituted  a  town  meeting. 
The  place  of  assemblage  was  at  first  any  conveni- 
ent spot ;  many  of  the  Providence  meetings  took 
place  "  under  the  buttonwood  tree"  or  in  one  of 
the  too  numerous  taverns.  In  the  earlier  and 
poorer  towns  the  church  was  the  usual  place  of 
meeting ;  but  in  course  of  time  the  well-to-do 
towns  built  town  houses.  The  Boston  town 
meeting  was  frequently  obliged,  for  want  of  space, 
to  adjourn  from  Faneuil  Hall  to  a  church. 

Once  assembled  the  people  were  called  to  order 
by  the  town  clerk.  To  this  important  officer,  usu- 
ally chosen  in  each  successive  year  for  a  long  pe- 
riod, are  due  the  written  records  from  which  we 
obtain  most  of  our  knowledge  not  only  of  the  town 
meeting,  but  also  of  many  important  colonial  in- 
stitutions. 

The  next  formality  was  usually  a  prayer  by  the 
minister.  The  warrant  was  then  produced — if  the 
constable  had  not  forgotten  it — and  duly  read. 
The  character  and  importance  of  the  business  thus 
indicated  differed  according  to  the  size  of  the  town 
and  the  exigency  of  the  times.  In  the  larger 
commercial  towns  like  New  Haven,  Providence, 
Salem,  or  Boston,  it  included  rather  a  wider  range 
of  legislation  than  now  comes  before  the  govern- 


Colonial  Zown  /llbcctiiia.  ^39 


ment  of  a  great  city.     In  the  small  farming  towns 
it  mifjht  be  no  more  than  a  few  items  like  this  : 


'&' 


"  These  may  notifie  the  propriety  of  Lancaster 
that  Jonath  moor  Requests  that  the  Contery  Rode 
or  Hiway — may  Run  by  his  door  in  to  Hog 
swampt  Rode." 

The  next  proceeding  was  often  the  reading  of 
important  colonial  laws  ;  especially  in  Massachu- 
setts the  "Laws  against  Immorality  "  were  read 
for  many  years  before  each  meeting  by  order  of 
the  General  Court.  Then  came  the  choice  of 
moderator,  who  was  elected  by  those  present,  usu- 
ally for  a  single  meeting.  This  was  an  office  which 
honored  any  citizen  who  held  it ;  among  the  Bos- 
ton moderators  w^ere  Sevvall,  Gushing,  James  Otis, 
Sam  Adams,  and  John  Hancock.  The  moderator 
was  chosen  by  a  "handy  vote" — i.e.,  a  show  of 
hands — or  sometimes  by  ballot.  His  duty  it  was 
to  "  consider  what  is  necessarie  to  be  done.  And 
to  see  that  order  be  atended."  In  various  towns 
fines  were  imposed  on  persons  who  attempted 
to  speak  without  the  recognition  of  the  mod- 
erator. 

The  title  of  the  chairman  suggests  that  there 
was  often  something  to  moderate.  Town  meet- 
ings were  meant  for  debate,  and  often  tended  to 
turbulence.  One  of  the  good  citizens  of  Provi- 
dence is  known  to  have  called  another  "  Jackanapes 
boy  in  our  Towne  meeting."     Roger  Williams,  in 


140  jessags  on  Government. 


one  of  those  scathing  letters  in  which  that  excel- 
lent man  delighted,  says  to  an  adversary  : 

**  In  all  our  Towne  meetings  js  jt  not  notoriously 
knowne  y^  you  are  so  far  from  being  swift  to  hear  & 
slow  to  speake  (according  to  God's  command  vnto 
vs) ;  y*  what  euer  is  propounded  or  by  whomsoeuer, 
you  are  ordinarily  y*"  first  y^  lets  fly  vpon  jt,  &  be- 
tweene  yo""  selfe  &  some  other  begins  y""  Dispute  & 
Contentyon:  y'  other  neighbo"  though  able,  an- 
cient and  Experienced,  shall  scarce  find  an  Inter- 
im, to  utter  thejr  thoughts  in  y''  Case  &  Business." 

Whether  stormy  or  peaceful,  the  meetings  in  the 
country  among  farmers  could  not  be  long  protract- 
ed ;  but  in  Boston  the  town  meeting  of  1700,  ac- 
cording to  Sewall,  "  Had  Candles  broke  up  at  8 
[P.M.].  Began  at  10  [a.m.]."  Meetings  were  not 
always  so  well  kept  up.  Sewall  says  of  the  meet- 
ing of  1687  : 

"  Town  was  generally  dissatisfied,  partly  said 
were  not  all  warn'd  and  partly  at  the  work  it  sett, 
so  most  of  them  that  were  there  went  away  and 
voted  not." 

In  its  procedure  the  town  meeting  did  much  to 
develop  the  parliamentary  forms  now  in  use  in  the 
United  States.  Petitions  vv^ere  numerous,  and  in- 
deed furnished  a  convenient  means  of  bringing  a 
question  before  the  assembly  for  deliberation. 
Committees  "  to  consider  the  matter  and  to  ripen 
things   concerning    it,"   as   the    Providence   town 


Colonial  Cown  /Iftcctiiifi.  Hi 

meeting  put  it,  were  freely  employed.  There  is, 
however,  little  trace  of  appeal  to  technicalities  or 
of  endeavor  to  gain  advantage  out  of  involved 
usages.  Debate  seems  to  have  been  allowed  so 
long  as  anyone  had  anything  to  offer.  Little  rec- 
ord of  the  speeches  remains  ;  rarely  a  representa- 
tive or  a  petitioner  or  a  candidate  for  office  came 
in  with  a  set  speech,  but  in  general  the  remarks 
seem  to  have  been  pointed  and  sensible.  Sam 
Adams  was  powerful,  not  as  an  orator,  but  as  a 
member  of  committees. 

When  debate  was  ended  the  question  was  taken. 
Usually  the  vote  was  viva  voce ;  occasionally  it 
was  by  show  of  hands  ;  in  grave  matters  "  papers," 
i.e.,  ballots,  were  employed.  The  latter  was  the 
method  in  election  of  representatives  and  colonial 
officers.  As  the  voters  grew  more  numerous  it 
was  found  necessary  in  Boston  to  hedge  the  ballot 
about  with  check  lists  and  other  precautions.  A 
distant  suggestion  of  the  Australian  ballot  system 
is  discernible  in  the  motion  in  1740  that  every 
man  be  required  to  write  his  name  on  his  paper. 
About  this  time  there  occurred  several  attempts  at 
ballot-box  stuf^ng.  While  the  Boston  town  meet- 
ing was  considering  the  question  of  granting  a  strip 
of  the  Burying  Ground  for  an  enlargement  of 
Kings  Chapel,  in  174S,  it  is  recorded  that  : 

"  The  Inhabitants  proceeded  to  bring  in  their 
Votes,  &  when  the  Selectmen  were  Receiving  'em 
at  the  Door  of  the  Hall  they  observed  one  of  the 


142  JEssags  on  ©ovcrnmcnt. 

Inhabitants  Viz^  :  John  Pigeon  to  put  in  about  a 
dozen  with  the  word  Yea  wrote  on  all  of  'em." 

He  was  fined  five  pounds  and  the  vote  was 
taken  a  second  time. 

Every  proposition  mentioned  in  the  warrant  and 
voted  affirmatively  by  the  town  meeting  was  bind- 
ing on  the  town,  and  even  in  cases  of  very  small 
majorities  the  minority  usually  acquiesced.  Occa- 
sionally, however,  a  minority  protested.  Thus,  in 
1 705- 1 706,  that  part  of  the  people  of  Lancaster 
opposed  to  the  site  selected  for  the  new  meeting 
house  appealed  to  the  General  Court,  and  thereby 
succeeded  in  delaying  the  settlement  of  the  matter 
for  a  year  and  a  half. 

So  far  in  the  investigation  we  have  reasonably 
safe  grounds  for  an  estimate  of  the  town  meeting. 
There  were,  however,  in  those  days,  as  in  our  own, 
certain  unrecorded  and  obscure  influences  which 
tended  to  control  the  popular  assemblies,  or  at 
least  seriously  to  affect  their  action.  In  the  first 
place,  the  proprietors,  where  they  existed,  had  un- 
due weight.  By  1750,  however,  this  power  had 
nearly  everywhere  passed  away.  Under  a  system 
which  brought  the  town  constantly  into  contract 
relations  with  its  own  citizens  private  advantage 
must  often  have  been  a  lever  in  directing  the  ac- 
tion of  a  town  meeting.  Upright  old  Sewall,  in 
171 1,  declined  an  election  as  moderator  "because 
of  the  Treaty  that  was  to  be  about  the  Burying 


Colonial  Zowm  /iRecting.  i43 

Place."  The  "  treaty  "  was  a  pending  proposition 
for  the  town  to  buy  a  piece  of  his  land.  In  the 
Providence  Town  Council,  in  1728,  the  laying  out 
of  a  highway  was  abandoned. 

"  One  or  two  members  of  y*^  councill  being  sus- 
pected and,  charged  by  petition,  of  being  interested 
in  y®  land  adjoining  where  y*^  highway  was  laid." 

An  occasional  hint  indicates  that  the  prelimi- 
nary caucus  was  not  unknown,  and  that  "  slates  " 
were  sometimes  arranged.  More  corrupt  influ- 
ences were  little  known  ;  the  standard  of  conduct 
was  high,  and  every  man  and  his  opinion  were  tol- 
erably well  known  to  every  other  voter. 

One  of  the  most  obscure  points  in  the  history  of 
the  colonies  is  the  degree  of  influence  possessed 
by  local  magnates  in  local  affairs.  In  Massachu- 
setts the  colonial  offlce-holders — judges,  financial 
officers,  and  others — exercised  a  power  and  patron- 
age which  greatly  exasperated  the  popular  party 
and  was  a  very  important  cause  of  the  Revolution. 
Many  rich  men  found  the  only  path  to  civic 
honors  through  the  uncertain  favor  of  the  town 
meeting.  John  Hancock  was  not  above  cultivat- 
ing his  neighbors  with  demagogic  arts  ;  an  inter- 
esting instance  is  his  invitation  to  his  debtors  to 
bring  in  the  depreciated  currency  in  payment,  be- 
cause he  "  preferred  "  it. 

Whatever  the  influence  of  ofifice  or  wealth,  there 
was  one  individual  in   each  community  who  was 


144  JEssags  on  Government. 


powerful  in  town  meeting  as  elsewhere — the  min- 
ister. He  was  often  the  only  educated  man  pres- 
ent and  he  was  armed  with  his  ecclesiastical  dig- 
nity ;  his  persuasions  or  his  logic  must  often  have 
changed  the  votes  of  town  meeting.  In  1776,  the 
Rev.  Thomas  Allen,  of  Pittsfield,  was  so  energetic 
in  local  politics  and  political  sermons  that  he  in- 
fluenced a  county  convention  to  refuse  to  acknowl- 
edge the  authority  of  the  courts  of  the  Common- 
wealth. It  is  not  possible  here  to  discuss  that 
subtler  influence  of  leaders  springing  out  of  the 
less  distinguished  part  of  the  community,  of  whom 
Sam  Adams  is  the  type.  These  men  used  the 
town  meeting  not  so  much  for  their  own  advance- 
ment as  for  instilling  great  political  principles  into 
the  minds  of  the  people ;  they  were  the  first 
American  politicians. 

What  were  the  functions  of  the  town  meeting  ? 
The  great  importance  of  the  institution  lies  in  its 
exercise  of  the  three  different  kinds  of  authority 
which  appear  in  the  extract  at  the  head  of  this 
article.  To  the  people  themselves  the  most  im- 
portant function  of  the  town  meeting  was  the 
regulation  of  local  affairs,  and  into  them  it  went 
with  great  thoroughness  and  minuteness. 

In  1664  the  town  of  Ipswich  solemnly  legislated 
against  a  well-known  canine  propensity  : 

"  It  is  ordered  that  all  doggs  for  the  space  of 
three  weeks  after  the  publishinge  hereof,  shall 
have  one  legg  tied  up.     ...     If  a  man  refuse 


Colonial  Zown  ififteetiiuj.  i45 


to  tye  up  his  dogg's  legg  and  he  bee  found  scraping 
up  fish  in  the  corne  field,  the  owner  shall  pay  I2s 
besides  whatever  damage  the  dogg  doth." 

From  this  record  of  thorough  legislation  by  the 
town  meeting,  it  may  be  interesting  to  turn  to  the 
remarkable  political  functions  which  characterized 
it  and  of  which  there  is  a  typical  example  in  the 
quotation  at  the  beginning  of  the  article.  Earliest 
of  recorded  powers  of  this  nature  is  the  election  of 
town  officers — first,  a  constable ;  soon  after,  select- 
men; later,  a  variety  of  other  of^cers.  Soon  the 
choice  of  town  officers  was  relegated  to  one  annual 
meeting,  usually  the  most  important  of  the  year. 
Sometimes  the  meeting  summarily  dismissed  offi- 
cers whom  it  had  previously  chosen.  County  and 
colonial  officers  were  also  voted  for  in  town  meet- 
ing, the  votes  being  sealed  up  and  sent  to  colonial 
officials  to  be  counted.  For  many  years  jurors 
were  also  elected. 

One  of  the  marks  which  most  distinguished  the 
colonial  town  meeting  was  its  right  to  choose  rep- 
resentatives to  the  colonial  Assembly.  In  all  the 
New  England  colonies  this  was  one  of  the  func- 
tions which  did  most  to  make  the  town  meeting 
a  school  of  national  politics.  For  many  years 
towns  in  Massachusetts  could  choose  non-resi- 
dents; but  the  practice  died  out.  Not  only  did 
the  towns  choose  representatives  ;  they  instructed 
them,  sometimes  in  a  specific  vote,  oftener  through 
a  committee.     No  punishment  could  be  inflicted 


146  JEssags  on  Government. 

on  a  representative  who  ignored  his  instructions, 
but  he  was  not  likely  to  be  re-elected. 

These  instructions  were  supplemented  by  many 
direct  expressions  of  the  town's  opinions  on  pub- 
lic questions.  The  action  of  the  town  meeting  of 
Boston  from  1763  to  1775  is  a  familiar  part  of  the 
history  of  our  country  :  it  hectored  the  governor ; 
it  appointed  agents  in  London  to  procure  the  veto 
of  obnoxious  colonial  acts  ;  it  incited  other  towns 
to  insubordination  ;  it  put  forth  declarations  of 
the  rights  and  wrongs  of  the  colonists.  Nor  was 
such  action  confined  to  that  period  or  to  the  great 
towns  ;  similar  resolutions  had  been  passed  nearly 
a  century  before.  As  early  as  1687  the  town  of 
Ipswich  voted  that  it  "  was  against  the  rights  of 
Englishmen  to  have  rates  laid  upon  them  without 
their  consent  in  an  Assembly  or  Parliament."  At 
a  time  when  newspapers  were  infrequent  and  un- 
influential,  the  town  meeting  was  a  nucleus  around 
which  crystallized  the  slow  formation  of  public 
opinion.  From  town  to  town  spread  an  organized 
opposition,  first  against  the  royal  governors,  then 
against  the  King.  The  instructions  to  the  repre- 
sentatives bade  them  stand  fast.  Through  the 
towns  it  was  easy,  when  the  Revolution  broke  up 
the  old  colonial  governments,  to  lay  the  founda- 
tions of  a  new  political  system. 


vri. 
THE   COLONIAL  SHIRE. 


On  the  Eastern  Shore  of  Virginia,  some  months 
ago,  the  writer  was  told  that  a  certain  man  wished 
to  be  elected  "  Commonwealth  for  Accomac 
County."  The  desired  office,  it  appeared,  was 
that  of  County  Prosecuting  Attorney  for  the  Com- 
monwealth of  Virginia.  The  connection  in  the 
popular  mind  between  the  local  office  and  the 
state's  authority  dates  back  to  the  earliest  colonial 
history;  for  Accomac  was  one  of  the  seven  shires 
created  in  1634  by  the  first  American  act  estab- 
lishing counties.  With  the  county  we  are  all 
familiar;  the  powers  of  county  government,  for 
evil  as  well  as  for  good,  were  illustrated  by  the 
Tammany  Ring  frauds,  under  Tweed's  direction, 
in  the  County  of  New  York.  We  have  county 
courts,  county  commissioners,  county  sheriffs, 
county  attorneys,  county  taxes,  county  regula- 
tions. To  be  sure  there  are  now  at  least  four 
types  of  county  government  in  operation :  the 
word  means  a  very  different  thing  to  men  from 
Massachusetts,  Alabama,   Michigan,  and  Wiscon- 

(147) 


148  fissags  on  Government. 

sin.  Nevertheless  all  the  varied  forms  may  be 
traced  back  to  one  prototype,  the  English  shire ; 
and  the  varieties  were  developed  in  colonial  times. 
The  colonial  shire  marks  therefore  a  transition,  and 
in  the  process  the  shire  increased  in  importance  ; 
so  that  our  present  counties  are  more  powerful 
than  that  from  which  they  sprang. 

By  the  Act  of  1634  the  seven  shires  of  Virginia 
were  to  be  "  governed  as  the  shires  in  England." 
What  was  the  shire  which  the  emigrants  had 
known,  and  what  was  its  government  ?  The  Eng- 
lish shire  was  the  principal  political  and  adminis- 
trative subdivision  of  the  kingdom.  It  was  a  ju- 
dicial district,  each  shire  having  a  court  of  its  own 
for  minor  offences  ;  it  was  a  military  district,  the 
able-bodied  men  in  each  forming  a  division  of  the 
militia;  it  was  an  executive  district  through  which 
the  laws  of  the  kingdom  were  kept  in  force,  and 
taxes  were  collected;  it  was  a  legislative  district, 
with  the  power  to  tax  itself  for  local  purposes,  and 
to  make  local  laws  ;  finally,  it  was  a  political  divi- 
sion, within  which  certain  officers  were  elected. 

The  shire  was,  of  course,  not  the  only  self-gov- 
erning subdivision  :  there  were  boroughs  and  cities 
and  parishes,  all  laying  their  own  local  taxes  and 
having  their  own  local  authorities  ;  but  the  shire 
differed  from  them,  at  the  time  of  the  settle- 
ment of  the  colonies,  by  having  lost  its  earlier 
popular  government.  The  only  direct  share  of 
the  people  in  county  government  was  in  the  as- 


^be  Colonial  Sbfre.  i49 


sembly  of  the  freeholders — perhaps  a  tenth  of  the 
adult  men — to  choose  two  unimportant  county 
ofificers,  and  also  to  choose  county  members  of 
Parliament,  the  so-called  "  Knights  of  the  Shire." 
The  government  was  in  the  hands  of  of^cers  com- 
missioned by  the  crown.  The  sherifT  collected 
taxes  and  executed  directions  of  the  courts;  the 
lord  lieutenant  commanded  the  milita;  but  the 
principal  officials  were  the  justices  of  the  peace. 
Their  joint  meetings,  called  "  quarter  sessions," 
were  not  only  judicial  courts  but  a  sort  of  local 
legislature.  They  levied  county  taxes  and  ad- 
ministered the  shire.  They  were  usually  not  law- 
yers, but  the  principal  gentlemen  resident  in  the 
county.  They  probably  represented  the  voters  as 
well  as  elective  of^cers  could  have  done,  and  there 
seems  to  have  been  little  dissatisfaction  with  the 
system  in  England, 

This,  then,  was  the  institution  which  Virginia 
in  1634,  and  the  other  colonies  soon  after,  attempt- 
ed to  transplant.  It  was  quickly  seen  that  the 
conditions  were  very  different  :  instead  of  a  dense 
population  with  few  land-owners  and  a  recognized 
aristocracy  from  which  to  choose  justices  of  the 
peace,  the  colonies  had  large  territories,  thinly 
populated,  many  owners  of  land,  and,  except  in  a 
few  colonies,  no  permanent  aristocracy.  The  ma- 
terials for  the  English  county  government  could 
not  be  found  in  the  colonies.  Moreover  there 
had  been  other  units  of  local  government  estab- 


150  jBsea^Q  on  Government. 


lished  before  the  counties  were  framed  :  the  towns 
in  New  England  and  the  middle  colonies,  hun- 
dreds in  Maryland,  parishes  in  Virginia  and  South 
Carolinia,  were  already  exercising  some  of  the 
powers  of  the  English  shires.  The  county  came 
in  as  a  sort  of  interloper,  in  some  colonies  always 
inferior  to  the  towns,  in  some  dividing  power  with 
them,  in  some  putting  them  into  an  inferior  posi- 
tion, in  some  driving  them  out  altogether.  The 
English  shires  were  all  substantially  on  the  same 
model,  and  could  be  altered  with  great  dif^culty  ; 
the  colonies  freely  tried  experiments  and  copied 
from  each  other.  Thus  Virginia  in  1662  tried  to 
make  the  shire  and  parish  independent  ;  in  1679 
to  have  a  sort  of  dual  shire-and-township  govern- 
ment; and  later  to  make  the  county  supreme. 

The  result  of  experiment  and  custom  was  that 
at  the  time  of  the  Revohition  there  were  four  dis- 
tinct types  of  county  government  in  the  colonies, 
and  each  of  the  present  States  of  the  Union  has 
adopted  one  of  these  types.  In  New  England  the 
county  was  subordinated  to  the  town.  County 
of^cers  were  elected,  to  be  sure,  but  their  powers 
were  few.  South  Carolina  and  Maryland  ad- 
hered in  general  to  this  type.  It  will  be  noticed 
that  these  were  all  colonies  of  comparatively  small 
area,  with  the  population  gathered  more  or  less 
closely  on  the  sea-coast  or  along  navigable  rivers ; 
and  they  were  all  commercial.  Local  government 
in  divisions  smaller  than  a  county  was  therefore 


Zbc  Colonial  Sbire.  15^ 


easy.  The  New  England  system  still  prevails  in 
that  part  of  the  country  and  in  some  Western 
states. 

The  second  type  of  the  colonial  shire  was  de- 
veloped in  New  York  ;  here  there  was  a  county 
government  and  in  addition  a  board  of  supervi- 
sors, each  member  of  which  was  chosen  by  a  town- 
ship. The  system  still  prevails  in  New  York  and 
has  been  adopted  in  Michigan,  Illinois,  Wisconsin, 
and  Nebraska, 

A  third  form  of  development  is  seen  in  Penn- 
sylvania. Here  the  towns  had  at  first  been  su- 
perior, but  they  were  afterward  subordinated  to 
the  county.  The  most  remarkable  thing  about 
the  Pennsylvania  system  is  that  the  county  ofificers, 
although  exercising  large  powers,  were  nearly  all 
elective.  The  Pennsylvania  model  was  followed 
by  most  of  the  new  Northern  states,  and  has  been 
the  most  influential  in  the  West. 

The  fourth  type  was  highly  developed  in  Vir- 
ginia. It  is  historically  the  most  interesting  to 
us,  because  it  was  least  like  our  present  county 
governments,  and  most  like  the  English  prece- 
dent. Hence,  the  county  was  the  recognized 
agent  for  most  of  the  purposes  of  local  govern- 
ment ;  the  parishes  existed,  but  were  compara- 
tively unimportant.  To  this  type  New  Jersey 
and  North  Carolina  inclined  ;  it  still  prevails  in 
most  of  the  Southern  states  and  in  some  of  the 
Western.      For   the    introduction    of   the   system 


152  Beeags  on  ©ovevmnent, 

there  is  a  geographical  reason  :  the  plantations 
were  widely  scattered,  there  were  no  considerable 
centres  of  population ;  a  large  area,  unsuited  to 
town  government,  must  be  taken  together  in  order 
to  collect  a  sufficient  population  to  form  a  local 
government.  The  average  population  of  a  Vir- 
ginia county  at  the  time  of  the  Revolution  was 
probably  less  than  that  of  a  Massachusetts  town. 
Still  more  significant  was  the  fact  that  county 
government  in  Virginia  was  out  of  the  hands  of 
the  people  and  exercised  by  officers  appointed  by 
the  governor.  As  in  England,  so  in  Virginia, 
county  administration  was  a  reversal  of  the  princi- 
ple of  popular  government. 

Amid  so  many  variations  it  is  of  course  quite 
impossible  to  describe  in  detail  the  form  of  colo- 
nial county  governments.  Much  more  than  the 
towns  and  parishes  the  shires  were  subject  to  colo- 
nial legislation.  They  were  created,  united,  and 
subdivided,  often  without  their  consent.  In  the 
New  England  colonies  there  were  few,  in  Rhode 
Island  but  three;  in  Virginia,  in  1781,  there  were 
seventy-four.  Nor  was  there  any  standard  of  size. 
In  1778  Virginia  erected  the  county  of  Illinois  out 
of  the  vast  region  between  the  Mississippi  and 
Ohio  and  the  Great  Lakes,  a  space  now  occupied 
by  more  than  five  states,  and  having  a  population 
of  fifteen  millions.  In  like  manner  county  offices 
were  created  and  then  destroyed.  Besides  the 
general  laws  prescribing  their  duties,  county  of- 


trbe  Colonial  Sbtrc.  i53 

ficials  were  subject  to  special  directions  from  the 
colonial  authorities.  Thus,  in  17 13,  Governor 
Spotsvvood  of  Virginia  gave  orders  that  on  the 
next  Sunday  a  proclamation  should  be  "  opened, 
read,  and  published  at  the  principal  church  of  each 
parish,  immediately  before  divine  service  by  the 
sheriffs  of  the  respective  counties,  their  officers  or 
substitutes  on  horseback."  Although  there  vvas 
nowhere  any  colonial  central  office  for  dealing 
with  county  officials,  their  appointment  by  the 
governor  in  many  colonies  gave  the  general  ad- 
ministration sufficient  control.  Occasionally  spe- 
cial provision  was  made  for  their  discipline.  It 
was  enacted  in  Virginia  that 

"Whatsoever  justice  of  the  peace  shall  become 
soe  notoriously  scandalous  upon  court  dayes  at  the 
court-house,  to  be  soe  farre  overtaken  in  drinke 
that  by  reasen  thereof  he  shalbe  adjudged  by  the 
judges  holding  court  to  be  incapable  of  that  high 
office  and  place  of  trust,  proper  to  inherett  in  a 
justice  of  the  peace,  shall  for  his  first  such  offence 
be  fined  five  hundred  pounds  of  tobacco  and  cask." 

Under  the  Virginia  type  of  shire  government 
— to  a  less  degree  under  the  Pennsylvania  and 
New  York  types — the  county  system  tended  to 
strengthen  the  central  colonial  government,  and 
particularly  the  governor's  authority. 

Had  the  body  of  county  voters  had  more  power, 
they  might  have  counteracted  the  centralizing  ten- 
dency; but  nowhere  did  they  elect  all  the  county 


154  Bssags  on  Government. 


officers;  and  only  in  Pennsylvania  did  the  elective 
officers  have  considerable  powers.  The  appointive 
officers  were  usually  worthy  men,  but  the  interest 
of  the  people  in  their  own  taxation  and  governor 
was  diminished  by  their  inability  to  change  their 
officers. 

There  was,  to  be  sure,  one  institution  which 
might  have  become  a  school  of  political  discussion, 
like  the  town  meeting:  in  Virginia,  Maryland,  and 
New  York  the  people  of  the  county  assembled  to 
elect  members  of  the  lower  house  of  the  colonial 
assembly.  But  the  voters  were  few,  through  the 
general  limitation  of  the  suffrage  to  freeholders ; 
and  they  had  no  power  of  legislation ;  the  element 
of  patient  and  general  discussion  was  wanting. 
Nor  was  the  choice  precisely  free ;  it  was  expected 
that  men  of  recognized  social  standing  should  be 
selected.  A  Virginia  gentleman,  about  1700,  wrote 
to  one  of  his  friends  that  a  member  elect  would 
"  not  be  allowed  to  take  a  seat  in  the  house  where 
none  but  gentlemen  of  character  ought  to  be  ad- 
mitted." 

One  device  which  might  possibly  have  solved 
the  difficulties  of  county  government  was  never 
tried  ;  perhaps  an  elective  county  council  might 
have  taken  the  place  of  the  appointed  commis- 
sioners. In  New  York  there  was  a  representative 
board  of  supervisors  side  by  side  with  the  appoint- 
ive ;  but  the  supervisors  had  no  powers  except  in 
regard  to  taxes.     The  only  suggestion  of  a  general 


tibe  Colonial  Sbfrc.  1S5 


county  council  which  has  come  under  the  writer's 
notice  was  made  by  the  town  of  Beliingham, 
Mass.,  in  1773,  as  follows  : 

"  We  think  it  may  be  proper  for  the  Town  to 
vote  that  we  desire  Boston  to  promote  in  each 
Town  within  this  Gov't  Subscriptions  of  Peti- 
tions to  the  Gen  Court  to  make  a  Law  to  estab- 
lish Assemblies  in  each  County  to  grant  County 
Taxes  and  do  such  other  Business  as  is  proper 
for  Counties  to  act,  with  Restrictions  suitable 
thereto." 

The  colonial  shire  officers  were  much  the  same 
in  function  as  those  in  England  ;  but  they  had  dif- 
ferent names,  and  there  was  a  tendency  to  increase 
the  number.  Still  there  was  never  such  a  multi- 
plication of  offices  as  in  the  town.  The  sheriff  was 
the  executive  ofificer  of  the  courts,  but  a  separate 
officer  or  officers  usually  received  the  taxes.  His 
service  met  with  obstacles  still  familiar  in  the 
West.  Here  are  some  of  the  returns  made  to 
writs  which  had  been  given  to  Virginia  sheriffs  to 
serve  : 

"  Not  executed  by  reason  there  is  no  road  to 

the  place  where  he  lives." 

"  Not  executed  by  reason  of  an  axe." 

"  Not  executed   because  the  defendant's  horse 

was  faster  than  mine." 

Throughout  all  the  colonies  the  most  important 
county  officials   were  the   members  of  the  board 


156  jessa^s  on  ©overnment 

variously  called  "  commissioners,"  "  court  of  ses- 
sions," and — more  commonly — "  county  court." 
This  board  was  founded  on  the  English  "  quarter- 
sessions,"  and  was  the  prototype  of  our  present 
county  commissioners.  The  word  "  court  "  does 
not  indicate  that  its  only  functions  were  judicial. 
To  our  forefathers  a  "  court  "  was  an  assembly, 
with  the  power  of  deciding  disputes  between  its 
members,  and  also  authorized  to  pass  votes  bind- 
ing on  all  those  entitled  to  attend.  The  great 
commercial  companies  held  "  courts,"  which  were 
only  stockholders'  meetings.  The  first  legislative 
assembly  in  America,  gathered  in  Virginia  in  1619, 
after  passing  the  earliest  set  of  colonial  laws,  pro- 
ceeded to  try  an  offender  and  to  sentence  him 

"  To  stand  fower  dayes  with  his  eares  nayled  to 
the  Pillory  .  .  .  and  every  of  those  fower 
dayes  should  be  publiquely  whipped." 

The  county  courts  possessed  a  similar  combination 
of  judicial,  administrative,  and  legislative  author- 
ity. 

The  character  of  the  members  of  the  county 
boards  is  therefore  a  most  important  element  in 
American  government.  Their  sessions  took  the 
place  in  county  affairs  of  the  town  meeting  in 
town  affairs.  Although  justices,  they  were  usually 
not  lawyers,  but  the  leading  men  of  their  county  ; 
in  the  agricultural  colonies  they  were  likely  to  be 
the  large  planters  or  large  farmers  ;  in  the  com- 


(Tbe  Colonial  Sbtrc.  i57 


mercial  colonies,  professional  men  and  merchants. 
They  might  and  often  did  at  the  same  time  hold 
town  or  parish  or  colonial  office  ;  indeed  the  colo- 
nial councillors — members  of  the  upper  house — 
were  often  fx  officio  entitled  to  sit  on  the  board  of 
the  county  in  which  they  resided.  In  Virginia, 
where  the  system  was  most  developed,  the  mem- 
bers had  the  unwritten  right  to  nominate  persons 
to  fill  vacancies.  Hence  arose  many  struggles 
with  governors  who  appointed  their  own  favorites. 
Thus 

"  Wm.  Johnston  Gent,  being  asked  whether  he 
would  accept  &  swear  to  the  Commission  of  the 
Peace  ;  now  Produced,  answered,  That  he  would 
not  accept  and  Swear  to  sd  :  Commission  because 
Anthony  Stroder,  William  Hunter,  and  William 
Lyne  are  put  in  the  Commission  without  a  Rec- 
ommendation from  the  Court." 

As  in  England,  service  on  the  county  board  was 
without  compensation;  but  it  was  an  honor  much 
desired.  One  objection  to  Mr.  William  Lyne  was 
that  he  had  begged  for  a  commission  from  the 
governor.  It  was  usual  to  serve  for  many  years, 
and  there  was  bitter  complaint  in  1698  because 
the  governor  of  Virginia 

"  Renews  that  commission  commonly  every 
year,  for  that  brings  new  fees,  and  likewise  gives 
him  an  opportunity  to  admit  into  it  new  favorites, 
and  exclude  others  that  have  not  been  so  zealous 
in  his  service." 


158  )£6sag6  on  (Sovcrnmcnt. 


In  Virginia  the  county  court  was  most  devel- 
oped and  had  most  power,  because  in  that  colony- 
most  stress  was  laid  on  shire  government.  When- 
ever the  powers  of  the  shire  were  diminished  it 
was  usually  the  county  court  which  was  shorn,  and 
not  the  sheriff  or  other  county  officers.  Every- 
where the  judicial  power  of  the  English  "quarter- 
sessions  "  was  retained,  and  in  many  colonies  ex- 
tended. In  Virginia  the  county  court  tried  for 
piracy  and  treason.  Usually  the  causes  were  less 
serious,  and  often  they  descended  to  petty  suits 
over  a  few  shillings  or  to  such  criminal  cases  as  the 
following  : 

"  Geo.  Dill  fined  [by  a  Massachusetts  court] 
40'  for  drunkenes,  &  to  stand  att  the  meeting  hous 
doar  next  Lecture  Day,  w'"  a  Clefte  Stick  vpon 
his  Tong,  and  a  Pap[er]  vpon  his  hatt  subscribed 
for  gross  p'mcditated  lying." 

The  following  was  the  judgment  of  a  Virginia 
court : 

"  That  if  Mister  Holmes  does  not  quit  worrying 
Mister  Jones  and  making  him  curse  and  swear  so, 
he  shall  be  sent  to  jail." 

The  military  functions  of  the  shire  were  also 
common  to  all  the  colonies  ;  it  is  probable  that 
the  first  counties  were  organized  in  order  to  pro- 
vide a  defence  against  the  Indians.  The  militia- 
men of  a  shire  usually  constituted  a  separate  regi- 


^bc  Colonial  Sblrc.  I59 


ment  or  other  military  body  ;  and  where  there 
was  a  shire  "  lieutenant  "  or  "  commander  "  under 
whom  stood  the  militia,  his  office  was  considered 
the  most  honorable  connected  with  the  county. 

The  next  function  of  the  English  shire,  the  ex- 
ecutive and  administrative  duties,  were  in  some 
colonies  entirely  withdrawn  from  the  county  gov- 
ernment. In  most,  however,  including  Massachu- 
setts, the  county  court  or  commissions  collected 
taxes,  supervised  enforcement  of  colonial  laws, 
and  even  saw  to  it  that  the  towns  or  parishes  per- 
formed their  duties.  Nowhere,  except  possibly  in 
the  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  types  of  county 
government,  can  the  county  be  considered  as  a 
confederation  or  an  aggregate  of  towns  or  parishes. 
The  same  people  were  collected  both  under  the 
town  or  parish  and  the  county  governments ;  but 
the  counties  could  not  create  towns  or  parishes  and 
could  not  legislate  for  them. 

Other  legislative  powers  were  abundant  in 
counties  of  the  Virginia  type,  and  were  not  want- 
ing in  most  of  the  other  colonies.  The  power  of 
the  shires  to  tax  themselves  for  shire  purposes  was 
almost  universal ;  and  in  one  colony  or  in  another, 
the  counties  provided  for  roads,  bridges,  the  poor, 
prisons,  inspection  of  commodities,  the  appoint- 
ment of  minor  officials,  and  many  other  matters. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  Revolution  the  counties 
suddenly  assumed  a  political  importance  which 
they  had  never  enjoyed  before  and  have  never  had 


i6o  jEssags  on  ©ovcinmcnt. 

since.  When  the  old  colonial  governments  crum- 
bled in  1774-76,  the  counties  formed  temporary 
centres  of  resistance  and  even  of  government.  In 
the  Continental  Congress  of  1774  sat  delegates 
chosen  by  the  counties  of  New  Jersey,  Maryland, 
and  Virginia.  Many  county  conventions  met  and 
passed  patriotic  resolutions.  The  most  celebrated 
instance  is  the  action  of  the  committee  of  Meck- 
lenburg County  in  North  Carolina,  which  on  May 
20,  1775,  passed  several  resolutions  to  the  effect 
that  there  was  no  longer  any  royal  authority  in 
North  Carolina,  and  that  the  people  of  Mecklen- 
burg County  had  no  government  except  the 
county  ofificers  whom  they  elected.  A  few  years 
later  the  people  of  the  County  of  Kentucky  held 
conventions  and  threatened  to  withdraw  from  Vir- 
ginia. A  very  singular  and  little  known  episode 
in  the  history  of  the  shire  is  the  attitude  of  Berk- 
shire County,  Massachusetts.  From  1775  to  1780 
it  refused  to  submit  to  the  authority  of  the  Com- 
monwealth. During  the  whole  five  years  no  court 
was  permitted  to  sit;  and  threats  of  secession 
were  openly  made. 

County  government  is  less  important  now  than 
it  was  in  colonial  times  ;  on  the  one  side  state  and 
national  legislation  reach  further  into  details;  on 
the  other  side,  cities  have  arisen  and  have  dwarfed 
the  counties.  Nevertheless  the  general  acceptance 
of  a  system  of  elective  county  officers  has  thrown 
new  powers  into  the  hands  of  the  people ;   the 


tTbe  Colonial  Sbtre.  i6i 

precedents  set  by  the  colonies  have  been  followed, 
and  the  four  types  of  county  government  have  fur- 
ther developed.  The  great  merit  of  the  colonial 
shires  was  that  they  kept  alive  the  spirit  of  healthy 
local  growth  and  vitality,  without  which  it  would 
have  been  impossible  either  to  form  or  to  preserve 
the  Union. 


II 


VIII. 
THE   RISE   OF  AMERICAN    CITIES. 


Of  late  years  there  have  been  many  able  dis- 
cussions of  the  problems  of  city  government  in 
the  United  States.*  Most  of  these  discussions, 
however,  have  turned  upon  the  forms  of  municipal 

*  Of  these  may  be  instanced:  Von  Hoist's  Constitutional  Law, 
g  I02  ;  Bryce's  American  Commonwealth,  chaps,  l.-lii.  ;  Wood- 
row  Wilson's  The  State,  g§  1030-1037 ;  Publications  of  the 
American  Economic  Association,  vol.  i.,  Nos.  2,  3,  vol.  ii.,  No. 
6  ;  Johns  Hopkins  University  Studies,  vol.  iv.,  Nos.  4,  10,  vol.  v., 
Nos.  I,  2,  3,  4,  vol.  vii.,  Nos.  i,  3,  4  ;  Publications  of  the  Ameri- 
can Statistical  Association,  New  Series,  Nos.  2,  3,  6 ;  W.  M. 
Ivins,  in  the  Political  Science  Quarterly,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  291-312  ; 
Seth  Low  and  James  Parton,  in  the  Forum,  vol.  ii.,  pp.  260,  539  ; 
A.  R.  Spofford's'The  City  of  Washington  and  the  Growth  of  Cities 
in  the  United  States  ;  Simon  Sterne,  in  Lalor's  Cyclopaedia  of 
Political  Science,  vol.  i.,  pp.  460-468  ;  E.  L.  Godkin,  in  the  En- 
cyclopaedia Britannica,  vol.  xvii.,  pp.  462-464  ;  Ford's  American 
Citizen's  Manual,  Part  L,  pp.  66-83  '  ^-  J-  Parker's  Study  of 
Municipal  Government  in  Massachusetts ;  Atkinson  and  Penrose, 
Philadelphia  ;  R.  J.  Ely,  Taxation  in  American  States  and  Cities  ; 
Wilder,  Universal  Problem  ;  John  Fiske,  Civil  Government,  ch. 
v.  ;  Census  Bulletins,  Eleventh  Census,  Nos.  14,  52,  64,  82,  176, 
206. 

(162) 


Bmeiican  Cities.  163 


governments  and  the  dangers  discernible  in  their 
workings  ;  the  existence  and  growth  of  cities  have 
been  assumed  as  a  matter  of  course.  Neverthe- 
less, the  fact  that  we  have  so  many  cities  to  gov- 
ern is  one  of  the  most  astonishing  in  history.  A 
little  more  than  a  hundred  years  ago,  the  whole 
population  of  the  United  States  was  under  four 
millions,  of  whom  hardly  a  hundred  thousand 
lived  in  cities.  There  were  in  1890  four  hundred 
and  forty-three  cities,  with  a  total  population  of 
more  than  eighteen  millions.  Since  1790,  the 
population  of  the  United  States  has  increased  near- 
ly sixteen  times ;  while  the  cities  have  increased 
in  number  more  than  seventy  times,  and  the  urban 
population  nearly  a  hundred  and  forty  times. 

In  the  causes  and  development  of  this  phenome- 
nal growth  may  perhaps  be  found  an  explanation 
of  some  of  the  complicated  problems  of  city  gov- 
ernment. This  essay  will  therefore  be  devoted  to 
three  inquiries  :  i.  What  causes  have  determined 
the  sites  and  distribution  of  American  cities  ?  2. 
What  has  been  the  growth  of  their  population  ? 
3.  What  is  noticeable  about  the  status  and  social 
condition  of  people  in  cities  ? 

At  the  outset,  what  is  meant  by  the  term 
"  city  ?  "  The  English  usage,  by  which  no  place 
is  strictly  a  city  which  has  not  a  cathedral  and  a 
bishop,  is  no  longer  applicable  even  in  England. 
To  use  the  term  for  every  place  having  a  so-called 
*'  city  "  charter  would  include  many  an  unimpor- 


1 64  JBeen^e  on  Government. 

tant  Charles  City  or  Falls  City.  In  New  Eng- 
land there  are  often  several  centres  of  population 
still  united  under  the  old  town  government,  but 
the  aggregate  is  not  a  city  in  name.  For  conven- 
ience, the  definition  of  the  Tenth  Census  will  be 
adopted  :  a  city  is  any  aggregate  of  eight  thousand 
or  more  persons  living  under  one  local  government. 
Before  noticing  the  rate  of  growth  of  particular 
cities,  it  is  desirable  to  consider  what  causes  have 
planted  and  nourished  our  chief  centres  of  popu- 
lation. The  reasons  which  can  be  given  for  the 
site  of  most  ancient  and  mediaeval  cities  are  here 
singularly  inapplicable.  An  Athenian  or  Salzbur- 
ger  suddenly  placed  in  our  midst  would  declare 
that  this  strange  people  had  deliberately  avoided 
the  most  eligible  sites,  and  had  exposed  them- 
selves to  ruin.  The  intelligent  Athenian  or  can- 
did Salzburger  must  quickly  see,  however,  that 
the  conditions  of  life  in  the  New  World  have  been 
different.  Our  cities  have  grown  up  in  a  time  of 
peace.  Steam-power,  artificial  roads,  and  the  use 
of  large  craft  have  changed  the  character  of  manu- 
factures and  commerce.  The  political  importance 
of  cities  has  diminished,  and  their  commercial  im- 
portance has  increased.  Little  as  he  might  admire 
the  external  appearance  of  some  of  our  cities,  even 
Alexander  or  Wallenstein  might  share  the  admira- 
tion which  Bliicher  expressed  when  taken  through 
the  streets  of  London  after  Waterloo :  "  Mein 
Gott,  was  fiir  eine  Stadt  zum  plundern  !  " 


Bmciican  Cities.  165 


Most  ancient  or  mediaeval  cities,  as  Jerusalem, 
Athens,  and  Rome,  were  grouped  about  a  hill ;  or 
on  an  island,  as  were  Paris,  Rhodes,  and  Venice ; 
or  on  a  promontory,  as  Constantinople  ;  or,  if  in 
flat  land,  they  were  not  immediately  on  the  coast, 
as  London,  Pisa,  Cairo.  The  reason  was  a  simple 
one:  they  felt  themselves  in  danger  of  attack,  and 
sought  the  most  defensible  situations.  It  is  not 
too  much  to  say  that  not  one  city  in  the  United 
States  owes  its  growth  to  its  protected  situation, 
Quebec  stands  like  a  Hon  on  its  rock  ;  but  there  is 
not,  and  never  has  been,  one  first-class  fortress  or 
citadel  within  our  present  limits.  So  far  is  this 
the  case  that,  of  the  twelve  largest  cities  in  the 
United  States,  seven  are  exposed  to  attack  by  sea 
and  insufficiently  protected."  Military  authorities 
assure  us  that  a  bombardment  is  by  no  means  the 
serious  affair  that  people  suppose.  Nevertheless, 
the  prosperity  of  the  coast  cities  may  at  any  time 
receive  a  terrible  blow,  because  other  than  mili- 
tary reasons  have  determined  their  site. 

A  second  great  reason  for  the  location  of  cities 
applies  as  efficaciously  now  as  at  any  former  time  : 
it  is  the  convenience  of  commerce.  The  sage  ob- 
servation that  Providence  has  caused  a  large  river 
to  flow  past  every  great  city  is  as  nearly  true  now 
as  it  was  when  Memphis,  Babylon,  and  Cologne 

*  New  York,  Brooklyn,  Philadelphia,  Boston,  Baltimore,  San 
Francisco,  and  New  Orleans  are  exposed  ;  even  Chicago,  Buffalo, 
and  Cleveland  are  on  a  frontier. 


i66  lEssa^s  on  Government. 

were  built.  As  nature  has  determined  the  position 
of  some  cities  by  furnishing  a  bold  and  therefore  a 
defensible  site,  so  she  has  selected  that  of  others 
by  inequalities  in  the  beds  of  streams.  The  site  of 
many  American  cities  is  on  a  river  at  the  head  or 
foot  of  navigation,  usually  just  above  or  below  a 
fall.  This  is  the  case  with  Louisville  and  Buffalo. 
St.  Paul  marks  the  commercial  head  of  the  upper 
reach  of  the  Mississippi,  as  Troy  marks  that  of  the 
Hudson,  and  Duluth  and  Chicago  the  head-waters 
of  the  St.  Lawrence.  More  often  the  large  city 
grows  up  at  the  mouth  of  a  river  or  near  its 
mouth.  This  is  the  case  with  many  of  our  lake 
cities,  as  Cleveland  and  Milwaukee ;  so  St.  Louis 
stands  on  the  first  high  land  below  the  confluence 
of  the  Missouri  and  Mississippi  ;  Baltimore  owed 
its  early  growth  to  the  Susquehanna  trade ;  New 
Orleans  and  New  York  are  famous  examples  of 
great  river  towns. 

The  history  of  the  world  has  shown  that  it  is 
much  less  important  for  a  city  to  have  the  length 
of  a  great  river  behind  it  than  to  have  a  good 
harbor  before  it.  Newburyport  at  the  mouth  of 
the  Merrimac,  Saybrook  at  the  mouth  of  the  Con- 
necticut, have  long  since  fallen  out  of  the  race 
with  Boston  on  the  Charles,  Philadelphia  on  the 
Schuylkill,  and  Providence  on  the  Moshassuck. 
It  is  the  harbor  that  counts  most,  and  not  the 
river  navigation.  The  further  up  into  the  land  a 
harbor  penetrates,   the  more   valuable  it   is.      In 


Bmciican  Cities.  167 


America,  as  elsewhere  in  the  world,  the  point 
where  the  tidal  water  of  an  estuary  meets  the  fresh 
water  of  a  river  is  marked  by  nature  for  the  site  of 
a  settlement.  Hence  the  foundation  of  the  great- 
ness of  London,  Hamburg,  Bordeaux  ;  hence  the 
importance  of  Norfolk,  Charleston,  Baltimore,  and 
Philadelphia.  New  York  and  San  Francisco  alone 
of  our  large  cities  lie  at  the  mouth  of  an  estuary. 

The  depth  of  harbors  was  for  many  years  of  less 
consequence  than  their  accessibility  and  protection. 
From  the  little  havens  of  the  Cinque  Ports  issued 
the  wasp's  nest  of  vessels  which  protected  the 
coast  of  England.  From  Duxbury,  Falmouth,  and 
Perth  Amboy  sailed  the  East  Indiamen  of  a  cen- 
tury ago.  The  increasing  size  and  draft  of  sea- 
going steamers  have  caused  a  concentration  of 
trade  into  the  few  large  and  deep  harbors,  and 
this  is  doubtless  one  cause  of  the  disproportion- 
ate growth  of  the  large  cities  in  the  United 
States.  As  the  coast  from  Nova  Scotia  to  New- 
Jersey  contains  the  best  harbors  in  the  North  At- 
lantic Ocean,  the  cities  of  that  region  have  a  nat- 
ural advantage  over  their  Southern  rivals.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  ports  from  New  York  to 
Norfolk,  and  the  lake  ports,  have  an  advantage  in 
their  nearness  to  supplies  of  coal ;  and  the  advan- 
tage increases  as  steamers  take  the  place  of  sailing 
vessels. 

Sixty  years  ago  New  England  seemed  likely  to 
lose    her    commercial    importance,    because    the 


i68  JEesags  on  ©ovciiiment. 

mountains  cut  her  off  from  direct  communication 
with  the  West :  it  is  not  enough  for  a  place  to 
have  a  harbor  and  good  communication  with  for- 
eign countries  in  order  to  grow  into  a  city  ;  it 
must  also  have  direct  and  easy  connection  with  a 
rich  country  in  the  interior.  Verona,  though  an 
interior  city,  has  for  ages  lain  at  the  mouth  of  the 
easiest  Alpine  pass.  Trieste  is  the  port  for  South- 
ern Germany.  For  the  same  reason,  Baltimore, 
Charleston,  and  Philadelphia,  Chicago  and  St. 
Paul,  have  had  a  better  opportunity  for  growth 
than  Boston. 

New  York,  in  spite  of  her  magnificent  harbor, 
suffered  from  a  mistake  of  the  geologic  forces.  A 
glance  at  the  map  shows  that  the  great  lakes  were 
meant  to  drain  into  the  Hudson  ;  and  their  waters 
still  protest,  as  they  thunder  down  Niagara, 
against  an  unnatural  diversion  to  an  estuary  frozen 
one-half  the  year.  To  remedy  the  mistake  of 
nature,  the  State  of  New  York  constructed  the 
Erie  Canal,  finished  in  its  first  form  in  1825  ;  and 
the  astonishing  growth  of  the  city  is  the  fruit  of 
that  undertaking.  Philadelphia,  Washington,  and 
Richmond  vainly  tried  to  imitate  this  triumph  ; 
but  Baltimore  rivalled  it  by  the  early  construction 
of  the  Baltimore  &  Ohio  Railroad. 

The  effect  of  our  railroad  system  has  been  to 
make  available  the  best  harbors,  wherever  found, 
and  to  make  large  areas  of  rich  country  tributary 
to  the  cities  upon  them.     Boston  could  scarcely 


Bmeiican  Cities.  169 


live  from  New  England  products  alone.  New 
York  depends  for  daily  bread  on  Ohio,  Michigan, 
and  Minnesota.  Of  the  seven  largest  cities  in  the 
country,  five  are  the  larger  Atlantic  ports — Bos- 
ton, New  York,  Brooklyn,  Philadelphia,  Balti- 
more; and  they  are  among  the  most  distant  from 
the  centre  of  food  supply.  The  second  city  of  the 
seven,  Chicago,  illustrates  another  great  change  in 
modern,  as  compared  with  ancient,  commer- 
cial conditions  :  Chicago  is  a  great  trade  centre. 
Its  site  was  determined  by  the  fact  that  a  little 
creek  made  the  most  convenient  harbor  at  the 
head  of  Lake  Michigan  ;  railroads  diverged  from 
it,  railroads  were  built  to  it.  It  has  become  a 
distributing  point  for  the  States  to  the  west  of 
it.  St.  Paul  and  Minneapolis  in  the  Northwest, 
St.  Louis  and  Kansas  City  in  the  Southwest,  owe 
their  growth  to  the  same  cause.  Their  site  was  de- 
termined by  their  position  on  rivers,  but  except 
the  trade  down  the  Mississippi  from  St.  Louis  to 
New  Orleans,  the  western  river  trade  is  now  of 
small  importance.  The  present  growth  of  the 
interior  cities  is  due  to  the  network  of  connecting 
railroads. 

In  the  series  of  commercial  reasons  just  dis- 
cussed for  the  growth  of  cities,  there  is  evident 
a  tendency  to  concentrate  trade.  The  few  places 
which  combine  good  harbors  or  a  central  situation 
with  lake  or  river  navigation,  with  established 
trade  routes,  with  artificial  means  of  transit,  and 


I/O  Bssags  on  ©ovctnment. 

with  cheap  coal,  must  more  and  more  gather  to 
themselves  foreign  and  internal  commerce.  It  is 
for  these  reasons  that  New  York  is  and  must  al- 
ways be  the  chief  city  in  the  Western  hemi- 
sphere. 

The  coast  cities,  however,  owe  only  a  part  of 
their  prosperity  to  their  situation  as  points  of  ex- 
change for  foreign  products.  We  sometimes  lose 
sight  of  the  fact  that  all  our  greater  commercial 
cities  are  also  great  manufacturing  cities.  The 
first  nine  cities  in  population  are  the  first  nine  in 
value  of  manufactured  products.  New  York  in 
1880  led  in  manufactures  of  clothing.  Phila- 
delphia was  second  only  to  Lynn  in  shoes,  and 
surpassed  Lawrence  in  mixed  textile  goods.  It 
is  not  merely  that  these  cities  manufacture  more 
because  they  have  more  people :  they  have  more 
people  because  they  manufacture  to  advantage. 

When  manufacturing  began  on  a  large  scale  in 
the  United  States,  certain  inland  cities  grew  up, 
because  they  had  an  advantageous  water-power. 
Rochester  and  Minneapolis,  and  especially  the 
towns  on  the  Connecticut  and  Merrimac,  owe 
their  prosperity  to  the  shrewdness  of  men  who 
caused  water  to  fall  in  an  orderly  manner  through 
their  overshot  and  turbine  wheels,  rather  than 
tumultuously  over  rocks.  It  is  a  very  singular 
fact  that  the  advantage  of  water-power  sites  for 
manufactures  is  at  present  very  slight.  A  high  of- 
ficial in  the  Amoskeag  Corporation — said  to  be  the 


Bmerican  Cities.  171 


largest  concern  engaged  in  textile  manufacturing 
in  the  world  —  has  said  that,  if  Manchester,  N. 
H.,  the  seat  of  the  works,  were  not  already  built, 
it  would  not  be  built  for  the  sake  of  utilizing  that 
important  water-power.  There  are  many  mag- 
nificent mill-sites  in  the  North  Carolina  mountains 
still  unused  and  likely  to  be  unused  for  many 
years.  Where  coal  is  cheap,  steam-power  is,  on 
the  whole,  more  convenient :  hence  the  growth  of 
Fall  River,  New  Bedford,  and  Providence ;  hence, 
also,  the  possibility  of  manufacturing  in  the  large 
coast  and  inland  cities  in  competition  with  the 
water-powers.  We  all  recognize  that  Pittsburg 
owes  its  prosperity  to  the  soft  coal  near  by ;  we 
less  often  reflect  that  Baltimore,  Philadelphia,  and 
New  York  enjoy  a  similar  advantage  over  the  New 
England  cities. 

The  success  of  manufactures  and  the  consequent 
distribution  of  population  into  manufacturing 
cities  depends,  perhaps,  less  on  the  natural  advan- 
tages of  a  place  than  on  the  skill  and  industry  of 
the  people.  The  great  ease  of  transporting  per- 
sons over  large  distances — an  absolutely  new  thing 
in  the  history  of  the  world — makes  it  possible  to 
mass  skilled  laborers  in  cities.  The  coast  cities  en- 
joy the  advantage  of  receiving  such  laborers  direct 
from  abroad,  and  thus  in  many  cases  they  have  the 
first  choice.  There  is  a  corresponding  disadvan- 
tage. Almost  all  the  immigrants  into  the  United 
States  land  at  one  of  four  ports — Boston,  New 


^7^  Bssags  on  (Boveinment. 

York,  Philadelphia,  Baltimore ;  and  these  cities 
fail  to  sift  into  the  country  beyond,  some  elements 
which  cause  them  much  perplexity. 

For  the  prosperity  of  the  country  it  is  far  less 
important  that  population  should  grow  than  that 
it  should  grow  intelligent.  In  this  respect  the 
coast  cities  have  some  advantage :  the  people  of 
the  great  seaports  have  always  the  inestimable 
stimulus  of  direct  intercourse  with  the  world 
abroad  ~  and  at  home;  hence  the  population  of 
New  York  is  more  likely  to  absorb  new  ideas  than 
the  population  of  Lowell  or  Cincinnati.  In  man- 
ufacturing cities,  on  the  other  hand,  social  and 
political  problems  are  more  difficult.  Here  it  is 
possible  to  employ  the  labor  of  women  and  chil- 
dren ;  the  taxes  are  more  likely  to  fall  upon  the 
large  corporations,  and  to  be  spent  by  men  who 
have  little  property;  the  manufacturing  cities,  even 
the  smaller  ones,  are  more  closely  peopled  than 
those  whose  greater  interest  is  commerce. 

A  distinct  class  of  cities,  numerous  and  popu- 
lous, has  grown  up  in  the  last  thirty  years,  away 
from  the  coast  and  from  water-powers,  but  around 
mines  of  coal  and  metals,  or  near  deposits  of  pe- 
troleum. Of  these  Pittsburg  and  its  neighbor 
Alleghany  are  the  most  important.  Places  like 
Altoona,  Cumberland,  Scranton,  Wheeling,  and 
Lima  are  rapidly  following  them.  Wherever  there 
is  coal,  manufactures  spring  up,  and  populous 
cities;  around  mines  of  other  minerals  have  grown 


Bmciican  Cities.  i73 


sometimes  strange  and  phenomenal  places.  Pit- 
hole,  Pennsylvania,  once  a  ragged,  unpromising 
hill  farm,  became  a  city  of  thirty  thousand  people  ; 
and  a  few  years  later  its  handsome  brick  hotels 
and  banks  were  inhabited  by  two  people,  and  its 
railroad  was  torn  up.  A  similar  fate  seems  likely 
to  overtake  Virginia  City,  Nev.,  and  may  possibly 
overtake  Leadville. 

In  addition  to  the  geographical  reasons  which 
have  just  been  enumerated,  there  are  certain  other 
physical  causes  which  assist  the  aggregation  of 
people  in  a  particular  spot.  That  place  which 
lies  near  a  good  water  supply  has  a  better  chance  of 
growth  ;  a  city  which  is  easily  drained  ought  to  be 
more  healthy ;  and  a  city  which  has  a  beautiful  and 
well-improved  site,  and  a  system  of  parks,  attracts 
people  of  leisure.  These  causes  have  a  smaller  in- 
fluence than  they  deserve  :  Philadelphia  has  now 
more  than  a  million  of  people  whose  chief  drink 
is  Schuylkill  water,  and  a  part  of  whom  grow  up 
in  spite  of  surface  drainage.  On  the  other  hand, 
cities  with  fewer  natural  advantages  cheerfully 
spend  large  sums  on  aqueducts  or  systems  for 
pumping  sewage.  The  less  fortunately  situated 
cities  have  often  the  best  water  and  the  best  pleas- 
ure grounds.  It  is  almost  inconceivable  that,  of 
all  the  wealthy  cities  on  the  Atlantic  coast,  not  one 
has  a  water-front  park  of  any  size.  The  growth 
of  the  population  has  been  unexpected  to  itself ; 
and  the  inestimable  privilege  of  a  beautiful  sea- 


174  Bssa^s  on  (?oveinment. 


front  has  forever  passed  away.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  Washington,  Chicago,  and  Boston,  hardly 
any  American  city  is  now  making  adequate  pro- 
vision for  parks  for  the  next  generation.* 

One  of  the  causes  which  had  most  effect  upon 
the  growth  of  ancient  and  mediaeval  cities  has  very 
little  operation  in  the  United  States.  Corinth, 
Perugia,  Augsburg,  were  little  independent  States  ; 
Syracuse,  Florence,  or  Nuremberg  could,  on  occa- 
sion, put  an  army  of  fifty  thousand  men  into  the 
field.  The  city  was  the  unit  of  political  life  :  cities 
grew  because  the  people  were  freer  there  than  in 
the  country.  No  such  tendency  has  ever  shown 
itself  in  America.  Beyond  a  few  angry  sugges- 
tions, during  the  Civil  War,  that  New  York  City 
be  created  into  a  separate  State,  there  has  been  no 
attempt  to  make  a  city  a  commonwealth ;  no  one 
moves  from  Boston  to  Philadelphia  to  escape  a 
tyrant's  rule  ;  no  County  Democrat  is  exiled  be- 
cause Tammany  has  the  upper  hand ;  the  cities 
are  subordinated  to  the  States.  It  is  hard  to  see 
how  it  could  be  otherwise ;  but  that  dependence 
upon  the  States  has  brought  a  danger  into  our 
municipal  system  :  the  well-meaning  people  of  the 
cities  have  come  to  look  to  the  State  government 
as  a  deus  ex  macJiina ;  they  expect  more  from  a 
change  of    charter  than   from  a  change  of  heart. 

*  On  this  subject  there  is  an  interesting  monograph  by  E.  R.  L. 
Gould,  in  the  Publications  of  the  American  Statistical  Association, 
New  Series,  Nos.  2,  3. 


ainciican  Cities.  '75 

It  is  probable  that  if  the  people  of  New  York 
City  were  left  to  themselves,  and  could  get  no  re- 
lief from  Albany,  they  would  have  to-day  a  better, 
cleaner,  and  more  economical  government;  and 
that  the  much  more  satisfactory  government  of 
Boston  would  be  improved  if  the  responsibility 
for  it  were  thrown  wholly  upon  the  Bostonians. 

When  a  city  is  once  started,  it  is  likely  to  grow 
from  the  mere  force  of  gravitation.  It  is  more 
than  a  figure  of  speech  to  use  the  terms  which  sug- 
gest the  superior  attractiveness  of  city  life.  What 
else  is  "politics"  than  what  the  people  of  the 
7r6X.t9  do  ?  What  is  the  "  urbane  "  man  but  the 
dweller  in  the  2irbs,  and  the  "  pagan  "  but  the  un- 
converted dweller  in  the  fields  ?  Nor  is  it  the 
higher  and  more  intelligent  class  which  is  most  at- 
tracted by  city  life :  where  one  person  is  drawn  to 
a  city  by  schools,  churches,  concerts,  libraries,  and 
theatres,  five  are  drawn  by  the  excitement  and  stir 
and  activity  of  a  city.  One  of  the  greatest  prob- 
lems of  modern  times  is  how  to  get  people  out 
of  the  exhausting  or  despairing  life  of  cities  into 
the  quiet  and  comfort  of  villages.  And  while  the 
country  life  of  Newport,  Lenox,  and  Manchester- 
by-the-Sea,  attracts  a  certain  class  for  a  season 
annually  more  extended,  an  increasing  number  of 
well-to-do  people  leave  the  smaller  towns  in  which 
they  are  first  in  wealth  and  influence,  to  engage  in 
a  doubtful  struggle  for  recognition  by  people  of 
greater  wealth  and  social  power  in  the  great  cities. 


176  jEesa^s  on  Government. 


One  city  in  the  Union,  the  most  beautiful  of  all, 
and  the  capital  of  the  nation,  owes  its  growth  in 
considerable  part  to  its  attractiveness  for  people 
who  can  live  anywhere  they  like. 

The  importance  and  the  beauty  of  Washington, 
however,    are    chiefly   due    to    another    cause   of 
growth,  the  last  here  to  be  discussed.     It  is  dis- 
tinctly an  artificial  city,  a  creation  rather  than  a 
growth.     There  have  been  times  when  the  will  of 
a  despot  has  caused  the  walls  of  a  new  city  to 
rise  :  Alexander  built  almost  as  many  cities  as  he 
destroyed.     The  will  of  the  sovereign  American 
people  has  also   established    cities,   and  of   these 
Washington  is  the  principal  one.      Some  city  was 
likely  to  grow  up  on  the  lower  Potomac,  but  that 
it  should  be  Washington  rather  than  Alexandria  is 
due  only  to  the  combination   of   political   forces 
which  determined  the  site  of  the  national  capital, 
— to  the  quarrel    over   the   assumption   of  State 
debts,  the  arrival  of  the  North  Carolina  members, 
and  the  compromise  arranged  between  the  astute 
Hamilton  and  the  too-confiding  Jefferson.     Sev- 
eral considerable  cities  have  been  built  up  in  like 
manner  by  votes  of  State  legislatures  or  conven- 
tions.    Harrisburg  would  be  no  more  important 
than  Lancaster  but   for  its  prestige  as  the  Penn- 
sylvani  acapital;   Columbus,  O.,  has  few  natural 
advantages ;  Jefferson  City,  Mo.,  would  be  a  ham- 
let if  the  legislature  had  never  met  there.     The 
smaller  centres   are   powerfully  affected    by  such 


Bmcrican  Cities.  i77 


political  distinctions.  A  few  years  ago,  the  peo- 
ple of  a  Kansas  county  were  seen  with  arms  in 
their  hands  settling  the  location  of  the  county 
seat,  or  boldly  moving  houses  from  one  would-be 
metropolis  to  another. 

The  site  of  Indianapolis  was  fixed  near  the  cen- 
tre of  gravity  of  Indiana ;  but  its  growth  is  due  to 
another  artificial  cause,  peculiar  to  new  countries 
like  America.  It  is  the  centre  of  a  great  system 
of  radiating  railroads;  and  it  has  grown,  while 
Cairo,  at  the  confluence  of  the  Ohio  and  the  Mis- 
sissippi, has  decayed.  To  create  a  city  by  con- 
verging railroads  upon  a  spot  in  the  wilderness  is 
not  always  possible ;  but,  when  such  a  centre  is 
formed,  it  draws  population  to  itself.  There  was 
a  time  when  the  established  towns  objected  to  the 
noise  and  bustle  of  railroads,  and  compelled  them 
to  avoid  their  limits;  for  this  reason  the  Boston  & 
Lowell  Railroad  was  obliged  to  steer  between  old 
towns  like  Woburn  and  Wilmington.  Now  towns 
strive,  compete,  and  tax  themselves  to  bring  a 
railroad ;  and  Woburn  and  Wilmington  are  glad 
to  have  even  branch  connections.  The  location  of 
the  first  repair  and  construction  shops  makes  the 
nucleus  of  a  town  or  an  addition  to  an  existing 
town.  A  positive  and  even  whimsical  influence 
has  been  exerted  by  railroads  in  their  choice  of 
termini.  An  interesting  example  of  this  power  of 
a  railroad  over  urban  growth  was  shown  a  few 
years    ago    in    the    building   of   the    Yellowstone 

12 


178  Bssa^s  on  Government. 

branch  of  the  Northern  Pacific.  An  enterprising 
man  had  secured  the  quarter  section  at  the  bottom 
of  the  valley  where  the  road  must  end.  Failing 
to  make  terms  with  him,  the  company  took  up 
the  upper  end  of  its  track,  and  established  its  ter- 
minus two  miles  farther  down.  But  in  the  long 
run  the  railroads  must  go  to  the  cities,  and  not 
the  cities  to  the  railroads.  Racine  and  Dunkirk 
are  discouraging  examples  to  the  company  which 
proposes  to  create  a  city  by  bringing  the  end  of  a 
line  of  rails  to  its  site. 

In  their  effect  upon  the  older  cities,  possessed 
already  of  inalienable  advantages,  railroads  have 
been  more  important  than  in  the  creation  of  new 
cities.  When  the  AUeghanies  were  pierced,  West- 
ern commerce  poured  down  into  the  termini  of 
the  railroads.  The  keen  eye  of  Calhoun  early  saw 
that  the  ship  must  come  to  meet  the  car,  and 
he  earnestly  advocated  a  great  railroad  from 
Charleston  northwestward.  But  Baltimore,  and  a 
little  later  Philadelphia,  had  Western  lines  years 
before  Charleston  or  Mobile  or  Savannah  or  Nor- 
folk or  Richmond,  and  even  before  New  York, 
Boston,  Portland,  and  Montreal.  The  passes  now 
occupied  by  the  New  York  Central,  Pennsylvania, 
Baltimore  &  Ohio,  and  Chesapeake  &  Ohio  Rail- 
roads, are  as  much  trade  routes  as  the  Suez  Canal 
or  the  Bosphorus  :  no  rival  roads  can  compete  on 
equal  terms  ;  and  no  neighboring  cities  can  outstrip 
the  termini  of  these  great  trunk  lines. 


Bniciican  Cities.  i79 


Another  form  of  artificial  stimulus  to  city  build- 
ing has  had  little  influence  in  the  United  States. 
A  colonized  and  colonizing  country,  no  cities  have 
been  built  up  by  distinct,  elaborate  schemes  of  col- 
onization. Settlements  like  Marietta  have  not 
grown  to  the  dignity  of  cities.  Settlements  like 
Rugby  have  failed  for  want  of  adaptation  to  the 
circumstances. 

The  principles  upon  which  the  growth  of  cities 
depends,  as  described  in  this  essay,  may  perhaps 
be  seen  more  clearly  by  applying  them  to  a  few 
specific  cases.  New  York  was  first  settled  because 
it  was  an  island — a  state  of  things  which  the  peo- 
ple have  since  attempted,  at  great  cost,  to  remedy. 
It  is  susceptible  of  defence  against  modern  forms 
of  attack,  though  at  present  its  defences  are  little 
more  substantial  than  that  fear  of  torpedoes  and 
rumor  of  a  novel  steam  craft  which  kept  the 
British  out  in  1814.  It  has  the  best  deep  harbor 
on  the  Atlantic  coast,  easy  of  access  for  the  larg- 
est vessels  in  the  world.  It  is  the  Mecca  of  most 
imports.  It  lies  at  the  end  of  a  magnificent  chain 
of  internal  navigation,  reaching  to  Chicago  and 
Duluth,  and  it  is  the  centre  of  some  of  the  greatest 
railroad  systems  in  the  world.  Furthermore,  it  is 
the  recognized  financial  centre  of  the  United 
States.  Commercially,  therefore,  it  has  no  rival 
in  the  United  States,  and  can  never  have  any  till 
the  hills  sink  down  behind  Boston  and  Philadel- 
phia, as   they  do    in   the   Mohawk  Valley.     The 


i8o  Besags  on  Government. 

nearness  of  coal,  and  the  abundant  supply  of  labor 
of  all  kinds,  give  it  a  great  advantage  as  a  manu- 
facturing city.  New  York,  with  its  adjuncts, 
Brooklyn,  Jersey  City,  and  other  near  cities,  has 
nearly  three  and  a  half  million  people,  and  is  al- 
ready the  second  centre  of  population  in  the 
world.  It  has  few  artificial  advantages :  it  is  not 
the  capital  of  the  State  or  nation  ;  it  is  divided  by 
arms  of  the  sea  from  two  of  its  three  systems 
of  railroads  ;  it  does  not  attract  people  by  the 
character  of  its  government.  It  is  the  largest  city 
because  it  has  the  largest  opportunity. 

Boston,  despite  its  great  natural  advantages,  is 
a  great  city  chiefly  because  of  the  character  of  its 
leading  men.  Like  New  York,  it  is  defended  from 
foreign  enemies  only  by  a  sense  of  what  is  proper 
among  gentlemen.  The  harbor  is  fine,  though 
not  easy  to  enter  for  large  vessels.  Its  eminence 
depends  less  on  the  Western  business  than  on  the 
fact  that  it  is  the  supply  point  for  considerable 
parts  of  New  England.  Indeed,  it  is  the  intimate 
connection  with  the  business  of  all  New  England 
which  makes  Boston  so  important :  as  a  manufact- 
uring centre  it  is  first  in  nothing,  and  only  third 
in  curried  leather  and  women's  clothes.  But  it  is 
the  centre  of  administration  for  the  New  England 
mills,  and  every  yard  of  goods  manufactured  pays 
its  tribute.  It  gets  its  share  of  immigration  from 
abroad,  and  more  than  its  share  of  people  from 
other   communities   in  the    United   States.     The 


Bmevican  Cities.  i8i 


natural  beauty  of  the  city  is  an  attraction,  greatly 
aided  by  the  park  and  other  improvements.  More 
than  any  other  city  in  America,  it  draws  people  to 
it  by  the  excellence  of  its  schools  and  libraries, 
and  by  the  public  spirit  of  its  citizens. 

Chicago  is  great  both  from  natural  and  artificial 
causes.  It  is  not  exposed  to  foreign  attack.  The 
head,  in  that  direction,  of  the  magnificent  lake 
water-ways,  it  is  practically  the  Western  terminus 
of  the  Erie  Canal,  and  the  most  important  station 
on  the  great  trade  route  from  New  York  to  the 
Pacific  Coast  and  Eastern  Asia.  Still  more  impor- 
tant, and  the  foundation  of  the  wealth  of  Chicago, 
is  the  great  valley  of  the  upper  Mississippi,  the 
most  fertile  large  area  now  occupied  by  man. 
Special  manufacturing  advantages  it  does  not 
possess,  save  that  Ohio  and  Pennsylvania  coal 
form  a  return  cargo  for  its  grain  fleet.  These  com- 
mercial reasons  completely  compensate  for  the  nat- 
ural disadvantages  of  the  place,  and  the  tremen- 
dous energy  and  skill  of  the  people  of  Chicago 
have  made  it,  and  will  keep  it,  the  second  city  in 
the  Union.  It  was  this  energy  which  early  caused 
the  railroads  to  stretch  out  like  antennce  to  the 
West,  and  which  then  foresaw  the  necessity  of  a 
like  connection  with  the  East.  It  is  fortunate  for 
the  people  of  the  city,  and  of  other  cities  likely 
to  imitate  it,  that  this  restless  vigor  is  now  hast- 
ening to  beautify  a  city  of  which  the  site  has  few 
natural  advantages.     Handsome  houses,  beautiful 


1 82  jessage  on  (Boveinmcnt. 


parks,  imposing  public  buildings,  great  libraries — 
in  these  Chicago  bids  fair  to  surpass  most  of  her 
older  rivals :  and  in  the  Columbian  Exposition 
Chicago  has  become  the  teacher  of  the  nation  in 
architecture,  as  in  energy. 

The  second  series  of  questions  to  be  examined 
in  this  essay  concerns  the  numbers  of  the  people 
in  American  cities.* 

The  total  number  of  "cities"  within  the  census 
definition — an  aggregation  of  eight  thousand  or 
more  persons  living  under  one  local  government — 
is  shown  in  the  Appendix.  The  increase  has  been 
much  more  irregular  than  that  of  the  total  popu- 
lation of  the  country.  From  1790  to  1840,  the 
increase  was  comparatively  slow.  In  the  next 
decade,  1840-50,  as  many  cities  were  added  as  in 
the  previous  half-century.     The  explanation  is  to 

*  On  this  subject,  the  most  valuable  source  is,  of  course,  the 
Census  Publications.  Mr.  E.  C.  I.unt,  in  the  A'ey  to  the  Publica- 
tions of  the  United  States  Census,  1790-1880,  published  in  1888 
by  the  American  Statistical  Association,  has  prepared  a  valuable 
comparative  index  to  the  forty  odd  volumes  and  to  much  other  sta- 
tistical literature.  For  the  purposes  of  this  paper,  four  volumes 
of  the  Tenth  Census  (1880)  are  especially  useful.  They  are: 
Vol  I.,  on  Population  ;  Vol.  II.,  on  Manufactures  ;  and  Vols. 
XVII.  and  XVIII.,  on  Social  Statistics  of  Cities.  A  part  of  the 
tables  are  reproduced  in  the  briefer  Compendium  of  the  Tenth 
Census.  Some  of  the  material  is  restated  in  Scribner's  Statistical 
Atlas,  with  illustrative  charts  (Newr  York,  1885).  From  the 
Eleventh  Census  of  1890,  we  have  as  yet  only  the  partial  bulle- 
tins, especially  No.  52. 

For  cities  outside  the  United  States,  the  most  convenient  sum- 
maries are  found  in  ^IwWiiW-iDictionary  of  Statistics  (&A.  of  1S91). 


Bmeiican  Cities,  183 


be  found  in  two  facts, — the  development  of  the 
first  system  of  Eastern  and  trans- Appalachian  rail- 
roads, and  the  beginning  of  immigration  on  a  large 
scale.*  The  same  causes  increased  the  cities  from 
85  to  141  during  the  decade  1850-60.  The 
Civil  War  rather  stimulated  than  retarded  the 
growth  of  cities  of  all  sizes,  and  raised  the  total 
number  by  85.  A  steadier  growth  of  60  in  the 
years  1870-80  made  the  total  of  286;  in  the 
next  decade,  1880-90,  the  number  increased  by 
more  than  one-half,  to  443. 

In  the  same  appendix  (Table  I.)  is  found  a  class- 
ification of  cities  by  size.  Nearly  two-thirds  (278) 
may  be  classed  as  small  cities,  having  less  than 
20,000  people.  The  cities  of  medium  population, 
from  20,000  to  40,000,  make  up  about  one-fifth  of 
the  whole  number.  The  large  cities,  having  more 
than  40,000  people,  were  74  in  number  in  1890, 
and  have  been  for  some  decades  pretty  steadily  a 
sixth  of  the  total  number. 

The  change  in  proportions  has  brought  about  a 
corresponding  change  in  the  average  size  of  our 
cities.t  In  1800,  it  was  35,000.  In  1850,  it  had 
fallen  to  less  than  32,000.  In  1890,  it  was  41,000. 
Or,  to  state  it  in  other  terms,  the  medium  and  large 
cities  attract  more  than   their  share  of  the  total 

*  The  lailioad  mileage  was,  in  1830,  23  miles;  in  1840,  818; 
in  1850,  9,021.     Immigration  rose  from  23,322  in  1830  10310,004 


in  1850. 

f  See  Appendix,  Table  II. 


1 84  B63a^6  on  Government. 

growth  of  city  population.  In  the  Eastern  and 
Middle  States,  the  formation  of  centres  of  popu- 
lation is  about  completed.  Henceforth  popula- 
tion will  grow  about  them  rather  than  form  new 
nuclei. 

The  443  cities  in  1890  are,  of  course,  to  be 
found  most  abundantly  in  the  most  populous 
parts  of  the  country — New  England,  the  middle 
coast  States,  the  region  just  south  of  the  Great 
Lakes.  But  the  distribution  of  cities  is  far  from 
being  the  same  as  that  of  the  population.  New 
England,  with  less  than  one-thirteenth  of  the  total 
population  of  the  country,  has  quite  one-fifth  of 
the  cities  and  about  one-eighth  of  the  urban  pop- 
ulation. New  York,  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsyl- 
vania, taken  together,  contain  one-fifth  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  United  States,  about  one- fourth  of  the 
cities,  and  two-fifths  of  the  urban  population.  The 
six  coast  States  from  Virginia  to  Florida  contain 
one-ninth  of  the  population,  one-fifteenth  of  the 
cities,  and  one  twenty-fourth  of  the  urban  popu- 
lation. In  1890,  as  many  people  lived  in  Brook- 
lyn alone  as  in  all  the  cities  of  those  six  States. 
A  still  more  striking  contrast  exists  between  New 
Jersey  and  Mississippi.  The  two  States  had  in 
1880  almost  exactly  the  same  population  (1,100,- 
000).  Of  these  there  lived  in  New  Jersey  cities, 
500,000;  in  Mississippi  cities,  11,814. 

Not  only  do  the  large  cities  gain  on  the  smaller, 
but  the  cities,  as  a  whole,  gain  fast  on  the  popula- 


Bmerican  Cities.  185 


tion  outside  of  the  cities.*  In  1790,  the  city  popula- 
tion was  but  one  thirteenth  of  the  total.  In  i860, 
it  was  5,000,000  out  of  31,000,000,  or  nearly  one- 
sixth.  In  1890,  it  was  29  per  cent.  This  is  a 
most  significant  and  fundamental  fact  ;  for  it 
means  a  gradual  change  of  the  basis -on  which  our 
institutions  rest.  The  republic  was  founded  for  a 
country  largely  agricultural,  with  a  diffused  popu- 
lation, having  means  of  easy  subsistence.  It  will 
soon  need  to  stand,  and  will  stand,  for  a  popula- 
tion of  which  one-half  lives  in  towns  of  4,000  in- 
habitants or  upwards.  The  present  proportion  of 
urban  population  is  by  no  means  alarming.  It  is, 
to  be  sure,  more  than  that  of  Italy,  or  France,t 
and  is  not  much  under  that  of  densely  populated 
Belgium  or  Holland.  But  it  is  rather  less  than 
that  of  Australia,  where  the  conditions  are  very 
similar,  and  about  half  that  of  England.  Im- 
proved methods  of  agriculture,  systematized  trans- 
portation and  distribution,  make  it  possible  to 
feed  and  to  keep  in  content  masses  of  popula- 
tion which  would  have  broken  down  any  medi- 
aeval government. 

Next  in  importance  to  the  question  of  the  total 
population  in  cities  is  the  question  of  the  compar- 
ative  growth    of    great    cities.:}:     Here,   as  in  the 

*  See  Appendix,  Table  II. 

f  An  elaborate  comparison  is  made  in  Mulhall's  Dictionaty  of 
Statistics,  p.  36. 

\  Tlie  statements  in  this  and  succeeding  paragraphs  are  based  on 


1^6  Bssags  on  Government. 

former  case,  may  be  clearly  seen  the  effect  of  the 
development  of  water-ways  from  1820,  and  of 
railroads  from  about  1830.  Up  to  1820,  Philadel- 
phia was  the  first  city  in  the  Union  ;  and  in  that 
year  it  was  found  to  be  the  first  American  city 
having  a  population  of  more  than  100,000 — a  dis- 
tinction shared  with  twenty-seven  others  in  1890. 
The  Erie  Canal  was  finished  in  1825  :  the  effect  is 
seen  in  the  rapid  leap  of  New  York  from  108,000 
in  1820  to  209,000  in  1830.  Thenceforward  it  has 
been  the  undisputed  metropolis  of  the  Union.  By 
the  census  of  1890  New  York  had  1,515,000  peo- 
ple. This  is  generally  considered  an  understate- 
ment, and  the  growth  of  the  three  years  from  1890 
to  1893  must  have  brought  the  total  up  to  a  num- 
ber little  short  of  two  millions,  or  about  as  much 
as  the  population  of  all  the  New  England  and 
Middle  States  in  1790.  Philadelphia  has  kept  a 
steady  upward  course,  and  numbered  in  1890  more 
than  a  million.  But  Philadelphia,  unlike  New 
York,  has  greatly  extended  her  limits  of  late  years, 
and  thus  has  swept  in  adjacent  centres  of  popula- 
tion. 

Brooklyn  is  a  phenomenon  among  the  world's 
cities.  Lined  with  wharves,  it  can  hardly  be 
called  a  commercial  city ;  abounding  in  factories, 
it  is  not  eminent  for  manufactures.  Its  indepen- 
dent life  is  dwarfed  by  that  of  its  great  neighbor  ; 

the  Tenth  Census,  Vol,  I.,  Population,  and  on  the  Eleventh  Cen- 
sus, Bulletins  Nos.   52,357. 


Bmeiican  Cities,  187 


and  the  social  and  political  activity  of  this  city  of 
806,000  people  is  decidedly  less  than  that  of  its 
nearest  rival,  Chicago.  The  table  shows  clearly 
the  rocket-like  growth  of  this  latter  American 
wonder.  In  1820  Chicago  had  no  population 
worth  considering;  in  1840,  it  timidly  appears  in 
the  census  with  5,000.  Lake  navigation,  the 
stimulus  of  Eastern  and  Western  railroads,  the 
Civil  War,  the  control  of  the  trade  of  the  great 
North-west,  have  brought  Chicago  up  to  the  sec- 
ond rank  of  American  cities,  from  which  it  is  not 
likely  ever  to  be  displaced. 

St.  Louis  now  slightly  surpasses  Boston  in  num- 
bers. Its  growth  has  been  retarded  by  the  slower 
development  of  the  South-west  as  compared  with 
the  North-west,  and  by  the  decline  of  the  Missouri 
navigation  and  the  decay  of  the  Mississippi  trade. 
New  Orleans  has  suffered  from  the  same  cause. 

The  next  two  cities,  Baltimore  and  Boston, 
have  been  close  rivals  in  population  for  a  hundred 
years;  they  have  been  much  alike  in  situation,  in 
relation  to  the  country  back  of  them,  and  in  en- 
terprise. Boston  had  18,000  to  Baltimore's  13,000 
in  1790.  From  1800  to  1870,  Baltimore  drew 
ahead.  In  1880,  notwithstanding  the  fire  of  1872, 
Boston  had  taken  a  leap,  and  maintains  what 
seems  likely  to  be  a  permanent  superiority. 

Besides  the  cities  mentioned,  there  are  three 
centres  likely  henceforth  to  be  of  very  great  im- 
portance.    San  Francisco,  in  1890  the  eighth  city 


1 88  Bssa^s  on  ©overnmcnt. 


in  the  Union,  enjoys  the  only  really  good  harbor 
between  Puget  Sound  and  the  Straits  of  Magel- 
lan. Were  the  fertile  country  back  of  it  as  broad 
as  that  back  of  New  York,  it  would  rival  the  me- 
tropolis. It  must  certainly  become  one  of  the 
world's  great  cities.  Kansas  City  has  advanced 
from  32,000  in  1870  and  56,000  in  1880  to  133,000 
in  1890.  By  its  direct  connections  eastward,  it  is 
drawing  business  which  would  otherwise  go  to  St. 
Louis,  and  is  becoming  an  intermediary  of  the 
South-western  trade.  The  same  state  of  things 
exists  in  the  North-west.  St.  Paul  and  Minne- 
apolis together  had  33,000  in  1870,  58,000  in  1880, 
and  300,000  in  1S90.  They  have  thrust  them- 
selves between  Chicago  and  the  far  North-west, 
and  are  likely  to  form  one  of  our  greatest  cities. 
They,  too,  have  secured  direct  Eastern  roads ;  but, 
as  these  roads  pass  through  Canada,  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  dual  city  is  leading  to  serious  com- 
plications of  international  trade.  A  growth  such 
as  these  cities  show  is  without  parallel  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  world.  The  same  influences  of  rail- 
roads and  of  vast  movements  of  commerce,  have 
been  at  work  abroad.  London,  Berlin,  Paris,  have 
gained  enormously;  but  Paris,  which  may  have  at 
present  a  population  of  2,300,000,  had  550,000  in 
1800,  and  nearly  2,000,000  in  1870.* 

In   this   eager   current  of    growing   population 
there   are   some  eddies.     Even  in  America,  some 

*  Encyclopcedia  Britannka,  9th  edition,  vol.  xviii.  p.  277. 


Bmcrican  Cities.  189 


considerable  cities  are  stationary  or  moving  back- 
ward. Tills  has  been  the  case  with  some  of  the 
smaller  New  England  seaports,  and  would  have 
been  the  case  with  all,  but  for  the  sagacity  of  the 
New  England  men  who  turned  into  manufactures 
the  profits  of  the  India  trade  and  of  whaling.  In 
1870,  Newburyport  had  11,000  to  Brockton's 
8,000;  in  1880,  Brockton  had  gained  19,000,  and 
Newburyport  but  2,000.  Milford,  Mass.,  in  the 
two  decades,  1870-1890,  fell  off  from  9,900  to 
8,800.  Oswego,  N.  Y.,  has  gained  only  500  in 
twenty  years. 

That  the  tremendous  growth  of  our  cities,  par- 
ticularly of  the  greater  ones,  is  very  unfavorable 
for  municipal  government,  hardly  needs  assertion. 
The  increase  of  numbers  means  that  the  people  and 
the  city  government  never  keep  pace  with  their 
own  necessities.  Cities  outgrow  their  charters,  as 
boys  outgrow  suits  of  clothes.  The  digestive 
organs  of  the  civil  body  are  constantly  overtaxed  ; 
comprehensive  schemes  of  improvement  become 
too  small.  New-comers  never  feel  the  same  pride, 
the  same  sense  of  ownership  and  responsibility;  and 
the  influx  of  strangers  hastens  that  crowding  of 
experienced  men  out  of  public  life  which  is  one  of 
our  most  disagreeable  public  ills.  But  the  problem 
must  be  met.  The  good  citizen  of  Boston  must 
make  plans  for  a  population  of  a  million,  and  for  a 
growth  of  municipal  skill  sufficient  to  control  that 
number.     New    York   must    maintain    a    popular 


I90  B0tiag3  on  (Bovcnuncnt. 


government  able  economically  to  care  for  four  mill- 
ions. The  danger  to  free  institutions  keeps  pace 
with  the  growth  of  the  population  of  great  cities. 

The  third  part  of  our  inquiry  relates  to  the  de- 
rivation of  city  population.*  There  are  three 
sources  from  which  our  cities  are  fed  :  first,  from 
their  own  natural  increase;  second,  from  an  influx 
of  native  Americans  from  outside;  third,  from  an 
influx  of  foreigners.  A  fourth  element,  which 
needs  to  be  taken  into  account  in  some  cities,  is  the 
colored  population,  which  corresponds  in  many 
respects  to  the  foreign  element. 

The  proportion  of  foreigners  to  the  total  popula- 
tion of  the  country  was  in  1890  about  15  percent. ; 
but  the  proportion  in  the  124  cities  and  towns  of 
25,000  and  upward  was  no  less  than  29  per  cent. 
In  other  words,  cities  and  towns,  which  contain 
about  one-fourth  of  the  population,  have  nearly 
half  the  foreigners.  The  proportion  holds  good 
throughout  the  various  groups  of  cities.  In  1880 
the  medium  cities  of  75,000  to  200,000,  taken 
together  averaged  27  per  cent;  while  the  smaller 
cities,  from  75,000  to  40,000,  average  only  24  per 
cent.  This  relative  disproportion  no  longer  ap- 
pears. 

*  The  figures  following  are  based  on  the  Tenth  Census,  Vol.  I. 
(Population),  and  the  Eleventh  Census  Bulletins,  Nos.  52,  83,  lOO, 
165,  357.  In  the  original  article  is  also  a  table  of  predicted  popu- 
lations, which  shows  the  difficulty  of  estimating  the  growth  of 
cities  between  Censuses, 


amciicaii  Cities.  191 


The  case  is  even  worse  with  certain  individual 
cities.  Boston  had  30  per  cent,  in  1880  and  33  per 
cent,  in  1890.  New  York  in  1880  had  40  per  cent., 
a  proportion  increased,  on  the  face  of  the  Census 
of  1890,  to  42,  and  probably  even  larger  than  the 
figures  show.  In  some  of  the  New  England  fac- 
tory towns,  the  foreigners  were  as  many  as  48 
per  cent.  In  Holyoke  and  Fall  River,  Mass.,  they 
had  increased  to  about  50  per  cent,  in  1890,  and 
are  probably  increasing.  Chicago  has  been  popu- 
larly supposed  to  be  more  than  half  foreign,  but 
the  Census  of  1890  shows  only  40  per  cent.,  or  less 
than  New  York. 

The  absolute  numbers  of  foreigners  in  cities  vary 
in  ratios  widely  different  from  their  total  popula 
tion.  Thus  in  1890  Atlanta  and  Cambridge  had 
almost  the  same  population.  In  Atlanta  there  were 
1,871  foreigners,  in  Cambridge  23,851.  The  for- 
eign populations  of  Manchester,  N,  H.,  and  Wash- 
ington were  about  the  same,  but  the  latter  city  has 
more  than  five  times  as  many  people  as  Manches- 
ter. Of  the  smaller  cities.  Bay  City,  Duluth,  and 
Paterson  are  notable  for  large  numbers  of  foreign- 
ers. The  great  interior  cities,  St.  Paul,  Minne- 
apolis, Milwaukee,  Detroit,  Cleveland,  Buffalo, 
Cincinnati,  had  within  their  borders  each  from 
50,0(X)  to  100,000  foreigners.  St.  Louis  has  1 1 5,000, 
San  Francisco  has  127,000.  But  these  numbers 
are  insignificant  beside  the  158,000  of  Boston,  the 
267,000  of  Brooklyn,  the  269,000  of  Philadelphia, 


192  B0sa\:s  on  (Borcnimcnt. 

and  the  vast  multitudes  of  450,000  in  Chicago,  and 
640,000  in  the  city  of  New  York. 

If  we  go  a  little  farther  into  the  details  of  nativ- 
ity,* some  curious  facts  appear  as  to  the  prefer- 
ences of  different  peoples  for  particular  cities  or 
kinds  of  cities.  The  Orient  sends  25,000  to  San 
Francisco,  but  only  about  6,000  to  the  fifty  other 
cities  of  greatest  population,  taken  together.  The 
Scandinavians  show  no  preference  for  the  great 
cities,  except  Chicago,  St.  Paul,  and  Minneapo- 
lis ;  elsewhere  they  are  as  frequent  in  the  country 
as  in  the  towns.  In  the  ten  largest  cities  dwell 
775,000  Germans,  who  make  up  1 1  per  cent,  of  the 
population.  This  is  nearly  thrice  their  average 
throughout  the  country.  Boston  is  least  beloved 
by  them ;  New  York,  Chicago,  Brooklyn,  St. 
Louis,  and  Cincinnati  most.  There  are  more 
Germans  in  New  York  than  in  Leipsic.  A  fourth 
of  all  the  French  in  the  United  States  may  be 
found  in  the  ten  great  cities,  which  have  but  a  tenth 
of  the  total  population.  Of  the  1,870,000  Irish, 
no  less  than  625,000  inhabit  the  same  ten  cities; 
and  270,000  more  dwell  in  the  next  forty  cities. 
Nearly  half  the  number  of  this  race  have  therefore 
chosen  cities  of  more  than  55,000  people.  Within 
the  ten  cities,  one  person  in  thirteen  is  Irish;  out- 
side them,  one  person  in  thirty-three.  The  natives 
of  Great  Britain  are  as  frequent  outside  the  cities 
as  in  them.  Of  the  980,000  British  Americans  in 
*  See  Appendix,  Table  V. 


Bmcrfcan  Cities.  i93 


the  country,  few  are  found  in  large  cities,  but  a 
much  greater  number  in  the  smaller  manufacturing 
places,  where  the  French  Canadians  congregate. 
The  Russians,  Hungarians,  Bohemians,  Poles,  and 
Italians  were  few  in  number  as  late  as  1880.  Since 
that  time  there  has  been  a  great  immigration  of  all 
these  races.  In  New  York  there  are  49,000  Rus- 
sians; in  Cleveland,  10,000  Bohemians;  in  Chi- 
cago, 34,000  Poles;  in  Brooklyn,  10,000  Italians. 
These  are  examples  of  many  such  colonies,  in  which 
few  persons  understand  English. 

It  is  evident  from  the  above  analysis  that  the 
large  cities,  which  most  need  efficient  government, 
are  precisely  those  which  receive  an  undue  propor- 
tion of  immigrants  ;  and  they  are,  moreover,  most 
attractive  to  those  immigrants  who  are  least  accus- 
tomed to  self-government  and  least  amenable  to 
mild  restraint. 

That  ignorant  immigrants  are  not  the  only  hin- 
drances to  good  city  government  is  shown  conclu- 
sively in  the  case  of  Southern  cities.  New  Orleans, 
though  a  seaport  of  large  trade,  has  but  14  per  cent, 
of  foreigners.  Baltimore,  by  far  the  largest  and 
most  energetic  of  Southern  cities,  has  but  15  per 
cent.  In  all  these  cities,  the  colored  element  takes 
the  place  of  the  foreign.  The  native  white  popu- 
lation of  Baltimore  is  about  the  same  in  proportion 
as  that  of  Boston — a  little  over  two-thirds  of  the 
whole — and  smaller  in  proportion  than  that  of 
Philadelphia,  where  it  is  nearly  three-fourths.  In 
13 


194  B0saB0  on  (Bovcvnmcnt. 

a  few  of  the  smaller  Southern  cities,  the  blacks 
actually  outnumber  the  whites.  This  is  the  case 
with  Selma  and  Montgomery,  Alabama;  with  Wil- 
mington, North  Carolina,  where  the  black  popula- 
tion in  1890  made  up  about  56  per  cent.,  and  not- 
ably with  Charleston,  where  they  were  about  60 
per  cent.  For  reasons  better  understood  in  the 
South  than  in  the  North,  the  negro  vote  seems  to 
cause  little  difificulty  in  municipal  elections.  ' 

The  proportions  of  foreign  and  of  colored  ele- 
ments have  been  much  studied.  Less  attention 
has  been  paid  to  the  very  important  question.  How 
many  dwellers  in  cities  were  born  in  other  parts  of 
the  United  States  ?  For  a  definite  answer  to  that 
inquiry,  figures  are  not  attainable.  But  the  Census 
of  1880  showed  how  many  people  in  each  of  the 
greater  cities  were  born  in  another  State  than  that 
in  which  the  city  is  situated.  As  people  born  in  a 
city  who  afterward  reside  elsewhere,  to  some  ex- 
tent offset  those  born  within  the  same  State  who 
afterward  came  into  the  city,  these  figures  may  be 
taken  as  representing  approximately  the  drift  of 
the  native  born  toward  the  cities.* 

The  great  cities  which  have  proved  most  attrac- 
tive to  people  from  other  States  are  Chicago  and 
Boston.  While  such  American  immigrants  formed 
in  1880  but  one-fifteenth  of  the  population  of  New 
York  and  one-ninth  of  that  of  Philadelphia,  they 
made  one-fifth  in  Chicago.     The  case  of  Boston 

*  See  Appendix,  Table  IV. 


Hmciican  Cities.  ^95 


is  even  more  striking;  52,000,  or  one-seventh  of 
the  population,  had  been  born  in  other  States 
than  Massachusetts.  The  census  for  Massachusetts 
for  1885  shows  that  40,000  people  have  come  into 
that  city  from  other  parts  of  Massachusetts.  The 
astonishing  result  is  that  of  362,000  people  at  that 
time  in  Boston,  only  about  135,000  were  born  in 
the  city  itself;  90,000  were  native  Americans,  else- 
where born;  and  114,000  were  foreign  born.  The 
city  most  remarkable  of  all  for  this  magnetic 
quality  is  Washington.  Of  the  native  whites  liv- 
ing there  in  1880,  one-third  were  born  outside 
the  city. 

The  movement  thus  vaguely  indicated  is  only 
one  of  the  three  great  elements  in  the  rapid 
growth  of  the  cities — a  rapid  natural  increase,  due 
to  easy  conditions  of  life;  a  rapid  immigration; 
and  an  influx  from  the  surrounding  country.  But 
the  first  two  of  these  causes  harm  only  the  cities 
themselves :  if  a  city's  children  increase  faster 
than  its  schools  and  workshops,  the  curse  falls  on 
the  city  ;  if  immigrants  outvote  and  control  the 
native  whites,  the  injury  stops  with  the  city  limits. 
The  farmer's  boy  or  the  mill-hand  who  comes 
to  the  city  brings  force  and  energy,  of  which  he 
deprives  another  part  of  the  country.  The  cities 
draw  not  only  the  worst,  but  the  most  promising 
elements.  The  desertion  of  the  New  England  hill 
farms  is  due  chiefly  to  the  better  opportunities  of 
the  city.     The  nation  gains,  for  the  same  persons 


196  Bssa^s  on  ©overnmcnt. 

have  a  larger  field ;  but  the  process  means  that  the 
political  control  of  the  farmers  must  some  time 
fail,  and  that  the  people  of  the  cities  are  eventually 
to  be  the  great  controlling  force  in  the  affairs  of 
the  nation. 

From  the  statistics  analyzed  in  the  preceding 
paragraphs,  it  is  evident  that  in  no  important 
American  city  is  there  any  danger  that  the  foreign 
will  outnumber  the  native-born  element.  Even  in 
New  York  the  proportion  has  risen  little  above 
forty  per  cent.  Nevertheless,  a  closer  examination 
will  show  conclusively  that  most  of  the  great  cities 
are  now  dominated  by  foreigners,  and  will  be 
dominated  by  their  descendants.  In  Boston,  for 
example,  there  were,  in  1885,  275,000  persons 
American  born  to  132,000  foreign  born  ;  but  137,- 
000  of  the  natives  were  minors ;  while  of  the 
foreigners  only  12,000  were  minors.  The  number 
of  foreign-born  and  native  adults  of  voting  age  was 
almost  exactly  the  same  for  each  element.  The 
children  of  the  120,000  foreigners  are  certain  in  the 
future  to  be  as  numerous  as  those  of  the  natives. 
Indeed,  the  120,000  native-born  persons  must  in- 
clude thousands  of  sons  and  daughters  of  foreign 
parents.  The  future  of  Boston,  therefore,  depends 
not  upon  the  children  of  the  Puritans,  but  upon 
the  children  of  the  stranger. 

The  excess  of  adults  over  the  normal  proportion 
in  our  cities  is  indeed  startling.  In  the  United 
States,  as  a  whole,  notwithstanding  the  large  im- 


Hmerican  Cities.  i97 

migration  of  adults,  the  number  of  persons  be- 
tween the  ages  of  fifteen  and  twenty  is  still  larger 
by  a  fourth  than  that  of  persons  between  the  ages 
of  twenty-five  and  thirty.*  In  Boston,  however, 
the  number  of  persons  aged  from  twenty  to  twenty- 
nine  years  is  greater  by  18,000  than  that  of  per- 
sons aged  from  ten  to  nineteen  years.f  We 
should  know  without  statistics  that  this  must  be 
the  effect  of  immigration.  The  statistics  tell  us 
of  the  thousands  of  recruits  from  the  country  and 
the  many  more  thousands  from  abroad.  At  every 
age,  adult  foreigners  in  Boston  are  hardly  less 
numerous  than  adult  Americans ;  and  from  the 
ages  of  forty  to  sixty  they  are  more  numerous. 
That  government  is  not  entirely  in  the  hands  of 
foreigners  is  due  to  the  fact  that  they  are  of  many 
nationalities,  and  cannot  be  brought  into  the  same 
parties  or  political  combinations.  In  New  York, 
however,  the  domination  is  much  more  evident, 
both  because  of  a  higher  state  of  political  barbarism 
and  because  of  greater  relative  numbers.  The  ap- 
pended Table  VI.  shows  in  round  numbers  the  state 
of  things  in  1875.  At  all  the  ages  above  twenty- 
nine  the  foreigners  are  vastly  more  numerous.  Of 
five  persons  above  the  age  of  thirty-five  years  whom 
one  might  meet  hap-hazard  on  the  streets  in  1875, 
the  chances  were  that  four  were  born  abroad. 
That  the  leaven  of  the  American  system  of  gov- 

*  Tenth  Census,  I. ,  548,  549. 

f  See  Appendix,  Tables  VI.  and  Vll.,  for  figures  on  this  subject. 


198  B06ag5  on  ©oveinmciit. 

ernment  working  in  this  mass  can  keep  the  body 
politic  from  decay,  is  a  most  striking  proof  of  the 
power  of  an  intelligent  minority  and  of  free  insti- 
tutions. 

In  the  cities,  as  in  other  parts  of  the  country, 
the  proportion  of  foreign-born  persons  must  very 
soon  decrease.  The  stream  of  immigration  in  the 
fifties  added  two  and  a  half  per  cent,  yearly  to  our 
numbers.  At  present,  though  still  great  in  vol- 
ume, it  adds  less  than  one  per  cent.  It  is  probable 
that  New  York  will  never  again  have  such  a  large 
proportion  of  foreigners.  But  it  must  be  admit- 
ted that,  it  is  the  children  of  foreigners  who  are 
next  to  assume  control,  and  their  children  who  will 
maintain  it.  The  precise  statement  as  to  the  num- 
ber of  native  persons  in  New  York  City,  one  at 
least  of  whose  parents  was  a  foreigner,  is  not  yet 
made  public.  It  is  probably  not  far  from  one-half 
the  population.  New  York,  then,  in  1890,  must 
have  had  seventy  per  cent,  to  eighty  per  cent,  of 
foreigners  and  children  of  foreigners.  The  wealth 
and  greatness  of  the  city  distinctly  show  that 
energy  and  skill  are  not  confined  to  the  native 
elements.  The  real  question  seems  to  be  how  far 
the  sons  of  foreigners  will  become  Americans,  how 
far  they  will  adopt  the  language,  habits,  interests, 
political  aptitudes,  which  are  presumed  in  the 
citizens  of  a  free  republic.  In  New  York  in  1890, 
besides  the  190,000  Irish,  the  German,  Scandi- 
navian, and  English  elements  were  about  300,000. 


Bmcrican  Cities.  i99 


There  seems  reason  to  hope  that  the  last  three 
groups,  at  least,  will  speedily  be  absorbed,  and 
that  their  children  will  be  Americans,  and  noth- 
ing else. 

Inspection  of  the  tables  showing  the  status  of 
Boston  and  New  York  brings  out  a  very  remark- 
able phenomenon.     As  in  many  parts  of  the  East, 
the  women  decidedly  outnumber  the  men  ;    but 
this  excess  is  due  almost  entirely  to  foreigners.    In 
Boston  the  native  males  in  1888  were  127,500,  and 
the    native  females  were  130,500.      The    foreign- 
born  males  were  59,000,  and  the  foreign  females 
73,600.     Or,  to  put  it  into  more  popular  form,  two 
American  girls  out  of   a  hundred   could  find  no 
American  husband  ;  but  thirteen  foreign-born  girls 
out    of   a   hundred    could    find    no    mate   among 
foreign  born  men.     Not  only  is  this  excess  pecul- 
iar to  the  foreign  element,  but  is  especially  notice- 
able in  the  ages  from  fifteen  to  twenty-nine.     In 
New    York,   the   surplus  of  foreign-born   women 
over  men  between  those  ages  alone  was   17,000. 
The  only  plausible  explanation  is  that  large  num- 
bers of  foreigners  come  into   the   cities   to   enter 
domestic  service;  and  that  in  large  manufacturing 
cities  there  is  more  employment  for  the   poorly 
paid  labor  of  women  than  is  possible  in  smaller 
places.     A  still  more  unaccountable  complication 
in  New  York    is   the   excess  by    5,000  of  native 
girls  of  fifteen  to  nineteen  over  boys  of  the  same 
age.     It  is  not  possible  from  the  statistics  to  learn 


200  jEssa^B  on  Government. 

whether  this  is  caused  by  an  exodus  of  young 
men  or  by  the  coming  into  the  city  of  American 
girls. 

The  questions  both  of  age  and  of  sex  have  a 
serious  bearing  on  the  welfare  of  cities.  At  pres- 
ent the  great  cities  have  an  abnormal  proportion 
of  adults.  During  the  next  forty  years  the  pro- 
portion of  children  will  steadily  increase.  Schools 
already  crowded,  and  systems  of  education  which 
ought  to  be  outgrown,  will  become  even  more  in- 
adequate. The  great  problem  how  to  deal  with 
homeless  children  will  be  still  greater.  The  ex- 
cess of  foreign-born  women  will  have  an  important 
bearing  on  the  new  question  of  woman  suffrage. 
The  effect  of  that  change,  if  carried  to  its  full  and 
logical  extent,  must  inevitably  be  still  further  to 
increase  the  proportion  of  the  foreign  vote. 

Allusion  has  already  been  made  to  the  political 
effect  of  the  colored  population  of  Southern  cities. 
The  social  effect  is  even  more  marked.  There  is, 
of  course,  no  prospect  that  the  dark  race  will  be 
absorbed ;  and  the  problem  is  therefore  a  per- 
manent one.  Even  in  cities  like  New  York  or 
Boston,  in  which  not  one  person  in  sixty  is 
colored,  distinct  colored  quarters  have  been 
formed  and  will  be  continued.  In  the  Southern 
cities  there  is  a  lack  of  that  harmony  of  feeling 
between  the  races  which  is  the  essential  of  stable 
society,  and  especially  of  good  government. 

We  may  now  summarize  briefly  the  conclusions 


amcrican  Cities.  201 

reached  in  this  study  of  the  conditions  of  city 
planting  and  city  growth  in  the  United  States : 

The  situation  of  cities  depends  chiefly  on  natural 
causes  ;  but,  once  planted,  the  larger  places  have 
power  to  profit  by  artificial  stimuli,  such  as  im- 
migration and  railroads. 

The  great  cities  of  the  future  must  grow  up  out 
of  present  cities,  large  or  small.  There  will  be  no 
more  surprises. 

The  tendency  of  systematized  transportation  is 
to  cause  the  larger  cities  to  gain  faster  than  small 
ones. 

The  tendency  of  modern  life  is  to  cause  the 
urban  population  to  gain  faster  than  the  general 
population. 

Since  no  sufficient  pains  has  been  taken  to  pro- 
vide for  the  future,  crowding  and  its  associated 
evils  are  likely  to  be  more  prevalent. 

Most  foreign  elements  will  eventually  be  ab- 
sorbed ;  but  the  effects  of  their  former  existence 
will  be  seen  in  a  type  of  character  in  cities  differ- 
ent from  that  found  in  country  regions. 

The  children  of  the  present  foreigners,  and  their 
descendants,  will  be  the  rulers  of  future  cities;  and 
the  great  unsolved  problem  is,  What  are  they  to 
be? 

Hence  the  hope  of  the  cities  is  in  the  genera- 
tion to  come,  and  the  best  service  that  a  reformer 
can  render  is  to  aid  in  putting  right  examples 
and  right  principles  into  the  minds  of  the  children. 


202 


Bssags  on  ©ovcniment. 


STATISTICS  ON  THE  POPULATION  OF  AMERICAN  CITIES. 
Table  I.— Number  of  Cities,  1790-1890.* 


8,000 

21,000 

20,000 

40,000 

75,000 

125,000 

250,000 

500,000 

To- 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

to 

tal, 

12,000 

20,000 

40,000 

75,000 

125,000 

250,000 

500,000 

2,000,000 

1790.. 

I 

3 

I 

I 

6 
6 

1800.. 

I 

0 

3 

2 

I8I0.. 

4 

2 

3 

0 

2 

[I 

1820.. 

3 

4 

2 

2 

2 

13 

1830.. 

12 

7 

3 

I 

I 

2 

26 

1840.. 

t7 

II 

10 

I 

3 

I 

1 

44 

1850.. 

36 

20 

14 

7 

3 

3 

I 

I 

ss 

i860.. 

62 

34 

23 

12 

2 

5 

I 

2 

141 

1870.. 

92 

63 

39 

14 

8 

3 

5 

2 

226 

1880.. 

no 

76 

55 

21 

9 

7 

4 

4 

286 

.^     1890. . 

173 

105 

91 

35 

14 

14 

7 

4 

443 

Table  II, —Comparison  of  Urban  and  Rural  Population, 

1 790- 1890.  f 


1790. 
1800. 
1810. 
1820. 
1830. 
1840. 
1850. 
i860. 
1870. 
1880. 
1890. 


Total 
Cities 
8,000. 


6 

6 

II 

13 
26 

44 

8S 

141 

226 

286 


Total  Urban 
Population. 


131,472 
210,873 
356,920 

473,135 
864,509 

1.453,994 
2,897,586 
5,072,256 
8,071,875 

11,318,547 
18,235,670 


Total  Percentage 

„   ^°r;.  of  Urban 

Popnlation.         ^^  ^^j^,_ 


3,929,214 

5,308,483 

7,239,881 

9,633,822 

12,866,020 

17,069,453 

23,191,876 

31.443,321 

38.558.371 
50.155.783 
62,622,250 


3-4 

4.0 

4.9 

4.9 

6.7 

8.5 

12.5 

16.1 

20. 9 

22.6 

29.1 


*  From  Tenth  Census  (1880),  I.  x.\ix  ;  Eleventh  Census  (1890),  Bulletin  No.  251,  p.  4- 
t  Compiled  from  the  Tenth  Census  {1880),  I.  xxix,  xxx,  670,  II.  xxii  ;  Tenth  Census 
Compendium,  I.  8  ;  Eleventh  Census,  Bulletin  No.  52,  p.  2. 


Bmcrlcan  Cities. 


203 


Table    III. — Origin   of  Urban    Population 

Cities  in  1880.* 


OF    Fifty  Largest 


Foreign 
Born. 


1.  New  York '  478,670 

2.  Philadelphia !  204,335 

3.  lirooklyn 177,694 

4.  Chicago 204,859 

5.  lioston '  114,796 

6.  St.  Louis I  105,013 

7.  I'altimore 56,136 

8.  Cincinnati 7i>6S9 

g.  San  Francisco |  104,244 

10.  New  Orleans j  41,157 

Ten  largest  cities   11558,563 

11-15.  Five  cities, —  Cleveland, 
Pittsburg,  lUiffalo, 

Washington,  Newark. :  209.854 

16-24.  Nine  cities  of  125,000  toi 

75,000 !  265,241 

25-45.  Twenty-one    cities   of 

75,000  to  40000 255,616 

46-50.  Five  cities  below  40,000..  I  41,673 

Fifty  largest  cities i  2,330,947 


Born  in 
State. 


647,299 

554,449 
344.324 
197,728 
196,256 

I73'453 
242,050 

151.447 

78,144 

151,086 


2,736,236 

419.819 
511.949 

622,965 
96,666 


4.387.635 


Born  in 
U.  S.  out 
of  State. 


80,330 

88,386 

44,645 
100, sgS 

51,787 
72.052 

34.127 
32-033 
51.571 
23,846 


579.375 

125,797 

138.936 

181,410 
50,802 


Total 

Native. 


1,076,320 


727,629 
642,835 
388,969 
298,326 
248,043 

245.505 
276,177 
183,480 
129,715 
174.933 


3,315,012 

545,616 

650,885 

804,375 
147,468 


5.463.955 


Total 
Popula- 
tion. 


1,206,299 
847,170 
566,663 
503.185 
362,839 
350,518 
332,313 
255.139 
233,959 
216,090 


4.874,175 

755-47° 
915,126 

1,059,991 
189,141 


7.793.903 


Table  IV. — Status  of  the  Population  of  New  York  City,  1875. f 


Under  5 
5   to   9. 
10  to  14 
15  to  19 
20  to  24 
25  to  29 
30  to  34 . 
35  to  39. 
40  to  44 . 
45  to  49. 
50  to  54. 
55  to  59. 
60  to  64 
65  to  69 
70  to  74. 
75  to  79. 
80  to  84. 


Ages. 


Males. 

Females. 

Total. 

Native. 

Total. 

Native. 

63,000 

63,000 

61,000 

61,000 

55.0CO 

51,000 

55.000 

51,000 

48,000 

42,000 

49,000 

43.000 

50,000 

40,000     ' 

58,000 

45.000 

48,000 

29,000     1 

59.000 

32,000 

49,000 

ig.ooo 

56,000 

20,000 

46,000 

14,000 

45,000 

14,000 

41,000 

11,000 

39-000 

10,000 

34,000 

8,000 

33,000 

17,000 

26,000 

6,000 

24,000 

5,000 

21,000 

5, 000 

21,000 

5,000 

II,DOO 

3,000 

11,000 

3,000 

9,000 

2,000 

11.000 

3,000 

4,000 

1,000 

6,000 

2,000 

3,000 

1,300 

4,000 

1,000 

1,500 

500 

2,000 

1,000 

700 

300 

1,300 

500 

*  Compiled  from  the  Tenth  Census,  1880,  I.  536-539.  Similar  figures  from  the  Eleventh 
Census  are  not  yet  attainable. 

t  Compiled  from  the  Census  of  New  York,  1875,  pp.  117-iig.  Similar  figures  are  not 
obtainable  from  the  Tenth  Census  (1880),  or  from  the  published  Bulletins  of  the  Eleventh 
Census. 


o 

00 


o 

< 

o 

2 
O 

U 

e; 
o 

o 
o 

< 
> 

Q 


n 


.J 
< 
H 
O 

H 


'uoiiB|ndoj 


o»  O  ro  »n  o\oo  m  0\  o\  o 
o^  t^vD  00  m  *-•  •-■  m  ''^  Ch 

\0   tCv^T  ro  eT  cT  «   IT)  rov^r 
O   ^^    O  'O    lo  f*^  in  m  M 


OVO     M     w 

ro  ro 

t>.  «  0\  ■* 

O  00 

■^    M      C>   •- 

O  r^ 

iri  m  o^  Oi 

m  in 

o^  u^ 

t^  cn  0  "H 

t^    M 

M 

t^  o" 

in 

■SApEJ*^ 


O  m  O^vD   ro  u^  r^  O   ""•  m  i 
«  nro   w   "^  O   r^co  m  ro 

VOOO    O^rn0    m>H    ■^t^CJi 

tC  cToooo  00  »n^o   en  0\  -^ 
IN   -^oo   o  ■*  -^  r^oo   N   t^ 


\0   m  moo 
M  CO    t^vO 

lo  d  'J  tC 
m\o  00  M 


fo  in 


•uSpJoq 


O    m  'T  0\^    rr'\o   0\  •*  tr^ 
\0    roUD  00    t^  O    H  VO    M    M 

00  '^  t^  -^  "^  invxT  M  -^  hT 
t^Ot^O'-'Omr^O'* 

^    N      M     W     M     M  M 


■o  in  Tj-  I-.  r^ 

IT.  00  vo  vo  ^o 

oo  d\  -^  m  i-^ 

in  o  'O  "^  ^ 

u-j  N    N    W 


'EDuauiy  qsiuudt^ 


"eousuiy  H^UJ-ia 


■"j-r-*mfomino»0  ro"0 
rot>.M  o  »-*oo  int^t>.« 
OO^wroNMfo       win 


■*  -^  ro  ■^'O   M   o  N   O  oo 

O    lOMD    w    in  On  u^OO  "O  vO 

O  ro(^o\t-<   O  ^'-■00  fo 


N     'i-  t^  O^ 
VO  CO    O    "-I 


moM-^oON'-'N  w  O 

«      M     w 


m  inoo  ■* 
t^  0  »o  m 

VO     -  00    'I 


•pu^llODS 


fno    N    C4    CJ  On  »-*    O  ro'O 

OO    O^OO    ITJVO  O    O-  ^  "^  N 

VO  VO  M^    w  \0  ro  lO'O  W    *^ 

00    l^  -^  ^  N  M  W 


two   lO  o\ 

(^    M     l^   t^ 

C4    »-■    M    -^ 

in  t^  t^  M 


•puepji 


moo  ■^  '-'  rnvo  00  t^  ^  00 
o.  O  ^  ^  o\mmt^w  O 
moo  00  ^t^mN  o  t^r-* 


Ol    tH 

vD  m 

r^  m 

t>.co 


a. 

o 


rrmo>t^O\rn«  mmrr 
On  o>  't-o  •-  m  r^^  0\  ro 
tnONt-^t-'W  -^m^  1^00 


•^  O  ro  ^O  M  -^vo  00  b- 
u-jM  M  o^co  mo  mo\ 
M  vo  'O  t^vD  m  o\  O  •-'  'O 


M    (N  vO  vO 
M    m  M    H 


M  00 
«   0\ 


t^  t^NO  oo 
m  ro  m  t^ 
ro  "4-  rooo 


mo    -    ■^«    -^NOO    roO 
•r  \o  «   ■»*-  On  m  f^.  r-vo   O 


r^oo    r^sO 
CO    m  M   On 


tN.VO 

00    fO 


•ajidiu;^ 

UKIUJ3Q 


-^UlpUEDg 


N 

m  0 

M     P4 

<^  SI 

oo-o  roo  onO  mmw   ■**■ 

t^ 

■*rN.fi^w   foONO   •"■  OvOn 

t^oo 

CO  lo  m  in  t>..  ■*  Tj-vo  On  fO 

O 

0    ro 

IN    On 

mvo 

Nommf^      mm-^ww 

M 

H 

OmDnO    mN    Oooco    •-'    M 

NO 

o  « 

M   CO 

r^  N 

On^O    fOt^OVO    0    M    NvD 

rO 

M  M  mw  ONOiroM  mro 

■»^ 

« 

M    N 

•-"vd 

.^  2. 

« 

-* 

M 

^? 

•ISBH  3HX 


I-  CO    O    m  -i-vO    "^  CJ  00    r<i 
On  m  On  m  On  m\0    O    '-'  CO 


«  \0    N  VD 

«   Tf  in  m 


t^  in 

O  i-o 
vo  oo 


i^ 


rt 


•-•    N    rO  ■<»•  m*0    t^OO    On  O 


O 

O 


wi2;  -rt 


S      H      O  U  O  U 


H^ 


.=  § 

c  M 

^s 

NO^ 
'    I/) 

:;;  bfl 

m  5 

I   ^^ 

oo  o 

fO  o 


,r9- 


11 

V 

—  flj 

o  >  . 

c.SS 
rt  5  3 

^   SO 

•c  o  "> 

~  "<» 

a  "M 

Ul 
^  ,-i2 

CQ    L-    1> 
<->    M    > 

(/^  :t3  o 

3     •£ 


•  —    T*^  t/l 


Bmcrican  Cities. 


205 


Table  VI.— Status  of  the  Population  of  Boston,  1885, 

Males. 


Born  in 

Born  in 

Total 

Native. 

Ages. 

Massachu- 

other parts 

Foreign. 

Sum  Total. 

setts. 

of  U.S. 

Under  i 

3.476 

37 

3,513 

24 

3.537 

1-4 

13.351 

480 

13,831 

550 

14,381 

S-9 

15.J65 

969 

16,134 

1,642 

17,776 

10-13 

11,219 

980 

12.199 

1,320 

13,519 

14-19 

14,061 

2,028 

16,089 

3,563 

19,652 

20-29 

19.147 

6,668 

25,715 

13.530 

39,245 

30-39 

10,580 

6,406 

16,986 

14.471 

31,457 

40-49 

S,66i 

4,634 

10,295 

12,143 

22,438 

So-59 

3.263 

3.004 

6,267 

7.144 

13,411 

60-79 

2,865 

2,238 

5,103 

5,009 

10,112 

80- 

214 

136 

350 

285 

635 

Unknown. 

2 

10 

12 

7 

19 

Total 

9,9004 

27,490 

126,494 

59688 

186,182 

Females. 


Under  i 

1-4 

5-9 

10-13 

14-19 

20-29 

3039 
40-49 

50-S9 
60-79 

80- 
Unknown, 


Total 


3,564 

41 

3.605 

25 

3.630 

12,893 

463 

13.356 

545 

13,901 

14,955 

1,024 

15,979 

1.726 

17.70s 

11,447 

1,017 

12,464 

1. 351 

13,815 

14,227 

2.275 

16  502 

4,968 

21,470 

20,057 

6,671 

26,728 

19,579 

46,307 

10,857 

6,270 

17,127 

16358 

33.485 

5.972 

4,994 

10,966 

12,949 

23.915 

3.474 

3,207 

6,681 

8.789 

15.470 

3.575 

2,901 

6,476 

6.795 

13.271 

448 

256 

704 

514 

1,218 

8 

8 

16 

8 

24 

101,469 

29,127 

130,600 

73.607 

204,211 

*  This  table  is  compiled  from  figures  specially  furnished  by  the  Massachusetts 
Bureau  of  Statistics  of  Labor.  Like  the  preceding  table  its  significance  would 
be  much  increased  by  plotting  the  figures  on  a  co-ordinate  chart. 


IX. 

THE    BIOGRAPHY    OF   A    RIVER   AND 
HARBOR   BILL. 


To  write  a  complete  and  accurate  history  of  an 
important  Act  of  Congress  would  be  to  throw  an 
illumination  upon  our  national  legislation,  nation- 
al government,  and  national  character.  For  every 
important  statute  is  the  resultant  of  all  the  so- 
cial, political,  and  economic  forces  at  work  in  the 
country.  Still  more,  the  process  of  legislation,  if 
we  could  follow  it  at  every  stage,  would  be  seen 
to  explain  some  of  the  most  obscure  and  most  in- 
teresting phases  in  the  life  of  the  nation.  But 
who  is  to  disentangle  the  threads  ?  Who  can  dis- 
cover the  undercurrents  of  influence,  of  individuals, 
of  corporations,  of  municipalities,  of  States,  of 
private  counsellors,  of  voluntary  advocates,  of  paid 
lobbyists  ?  who  is  to  assign  the  rightful  equivalent 
to  each  member  of  the  legislative  body,  to  the 
President,  to  his  eight  official  advisers,  to  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  to  each 

(206) 


IRlver  an?  IF^arbcr  JBdl.  207 


of  the  eighty-eight  Senators  and  three  hundred 
and  fifty-six  Representatives  ?  Above  all,  who  is 
to  measure  the  effect  of  tradition,  precedent,  and 
forms  of  organization  ?  We  have  a  careful  and 
reasonably  exact  record  of  words  spoken  and  action 
taken  on  the  floors  of  Congress  ;  but  who  will  tell 
us  what  goes  on  in  committee,  or  in  private  con- 
ference, or  in  the  lobby  ?  who  knows  the  mo- 
tives which  cause  votes  to  combine  and  separate  ? 

This  essay  is,  therefore,  not  a  history  of  the 
River  and  Harbor  Bill  of  1887.  It  is  an  attempt 
to  consider  it  as  one  might  study  the  life  of  a 
rather  obscure  public  man;  the  outward  events  are 
few  and  uninteresting  ;  but  at  every  stage  we  come 
in  contact  with  persons  and  organisms  which  the 
bill  helps  us  to  explain.  The  dullest  man  may 
meet  and  observe  kings ;  the  dreariest  act  for  in- 
ternal improvements  illustrates  at  the  same  time 
the  manner  of  legislating  in  Congress,  and  the  way 
in  which  the  public  funds  are  spent  by  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  sixty-four  million  American 
sovereigns. 

There  is  a  reason  why  the  annual  River  and 
Harbor  Bill  especially  rewards  the  student.  It  is 
a  sort  of  comet  in  the  congressional  planetary 
system.  Other  appropriation  bills  appear  each 
year  in  about  the  same  form,  pass  through  the 
same  sort  of  debate,  and  are  approved  as  the  same 
matter  of  course.  The  River  and  Harbor  bill  has 
an  orbit  of  its  own  ;  no  man  is  able  to  predict  its 


2o8  }E60as6  on  ©ovcvnmcnt. 

splendor  or  the  time  of  its  appearance.  It  dashes 
into  Congress,  and  is  attracted  hither  and  thither; 
and  to  the  last  moment  it  is  uncertain  whether  it 
will  escape  on  its  parabolic  path,  or  collide  with  a 
disagreement  of  the  Houses  or  an  executive  veto. 
For  this  erratic  behavior  there  are  two  causes  :  the 
bill  is  made  up  by  a  special  machinery ;  and  the  bill 
is  a  luxury.  Members  of  Congress  must  have  their 
salary  and  mileage  ;  and  pensioners  and  Presidents 
must  be  paid  ;  but  rivers  will  flow  and  tides  rise 
whether  the  appropriation  passes  or  fails.  The 
enemies  of  the  bill  are  therefore  sure  to  attack  it, 
without  any  fear  of  crippling  the  government,  and 
a  counter-effort  is  made  to  introduce  it  in  a  form 
as  inoffensive  as  possible. 

Before  the  bill  is  finally  submitted  to  Congress 
it  passes  through  four  stages  of  preparation  :  local 
engineers  survey  and  estimate;  the  chief  of 
engineers  estimates ;  the  Secretary  of  War  esti- 
mates ;  and  the  committee  considers.  The  pre- 
liminary survey  must  have  been  authorized  by  a 
previous  River  and  Harbor  Act,  and  is  not  per- 
mitted until  the  local  engineer  has  reported  that 
the  improvement  will  be,  of  public  necessity,  and 
that  the  place  is  worthy  of  improvement.  In 
point  of  fact,  a  survey  is  rarely  refused.  The  local 
engineer  then  submits  a  plan  and  estimates.  The 
chief  of  engineers  may  alter  the  plan  and  pare  down 
the  estimate. 

The  official  life  of  our  bill  began   October  28, 


IRivcr  anC>  Uiaibor  JCill.  209 


1886,  when  the  chief  of  engineers  submitted  his  re- 
port, and  set  down  as  sums  which  might  profitably 
be  spent  in  the  fiscal  year  1887-88,  items  footing 
to  about  $30,000,000.  The  Secretary  of  War,  in 
his  report,  November  30,  1886,  pared  down,  in  his 
turn,  and  estimated  "  for  improving  rivers  and 
harbors,  $10,175,870."  Save  in  exceptional  cases, 
the  War  Department  considers  itself  the  agent  of 
Congress  in  ascertaining  the  practicability  of  im- 
provements, and  in  forming  engineering  plans ; 
and  makes  no  suggestions  as  to  the  policy  of  in- 
ternal improvements,  or  of  particular  expenditures. 
The  Egyptians  named  not  the  name  of  Osiris, 
and  it  is  with  some  trepidation  that  a  layman 
mentions  the  Standing  Committee  on  Rivers  and 
Harbors  in  the  House  of  Representatives — more 
particularly  since  it  has  seen  fit  to  recommend  a 
survey  of  the  Charles  River  from  Boston  to 
Watertown,  Mass.  There  is  a  mystery  hover- 
ing over  the  operations  of  standing  committees 
of  Congress,  a  mystery  only  partially  removed 
by  Professor  Woodrow  Wilson  in  his  suggestive 
book  on  Congressional  Government.  The  com- 
mittee which  has  just  been  mentioned  is  one  of 
the  few  House  committees  besides  the  Commit- 
tee on  Appropriations,  which  has  the  power  of 
reporting  general  appropriation  bills.  Up  to 
March,  1883,  the  annual  River  and  Harbor  Bill 
was  prepared  by  the  Committee  on  Commerce. 
In  several  successive  Congresses  it  was  attempted 
14 


2IO  Bssa^e  en  ©overnmcnt. 

to  divide  that  committee,  which  the  House  was 
pleased  to  think  overburdened.  In  1882  the 
chairman,  Mr.  Reagan,  forced  through  the  House 
the  worst  River  and  Harbor  Bill  that  has  ever 
been  passed.  In  December,  1883,  Congress  adopt- 
ed a  new  rule,  placing  under  the  control  of  a  new 
committee  all  measures  relating  to  rivers  and  har- 
bors. In  this  case  the  immense  power  of  the 
Speaker,  through  his  appointment  of  committees, 
was  well  exercised.  Mr.  Willis,  of  Kentucky,  the 
chairman  of  the  River  and  Harbor  Committee, 
which  framed  the  bill  of  1887,  showed  himself  a 
candid,  industrious,  fair,  and  honest  man.  That 
two  of  his  four  bills  failed  is  due  rather  to  amend- 
ments forced  upon  him  than  to  measures  which 
he  advocated. 

It  is  no  sinecure  to  sit  as  one  of  the  fifteen 
members  of  the  committee.  In  the  first  place,  to 
that  committee  are  referred  all  petitions  and 
memorials  and  all  individual  bills  bearing  on  in- 
ternal improvements.  Of  the  bills,  vast  numbers 
were  formerly  introduced ;  at  present,  members 
prefer  to  go  before  the  committee  in  person,  and 
the  memorials  are  in  most  cases  sent  direct.  Next 
come  the  voluminous  estimates  of  the  chief  of 
engineers  and  his  subordinates,  covering  thousands 
of  pages  ;  the  committee  then  attempt  to  digest 
the  statistics  of  each  river  and  port  seeking  an  ap- 
propriation. The  Secretary  of  War  is  called  upon 
for  information.     Mr.  Willis  further  adopted  the 


IRivci- aiiD  H^arboi  .1Bi[l.  211 

plan  of  asking  all  the  members  of  both  Houses  to 
appear  before  the  committee,  where  each  was  at 
liberty  to  present  the  needs  of  his  district  or  State  ; 
and  nine-tenths  of  them  came  forward.  In  ad- 
dition, there  were  received  and  heard  delegations 
from  leading  cities  and  from  chambers  of  com- 
merce— all  upon  a  similar  errand. 

"  The  horse  leech  hath  two  daughters,"  said 
Solomon,  "  crying,  give  !  give  !  "  and  the  River  and 
Harbor  Committee  never  suffers  for  want  of  in- 
formation in  favor  of  appropriations.  Unfortu- 
nately, though  every  job  is  likely  to  have  an  un- 
tiring advocate,  the  public  interest  has  only  such 
hard-worked  and  preoccupied  members  as  look  out- 
side their  own  districts ;  there  are  a  dozen  pleas 
for  expenditure,  against  one  protest  at  extrava- 
gance. There  is  no  organized  River  and  Harbor 
lobby,  for  almost  every  Congressman  is  an  inter- 
ested party  in  some  clause  of  the  bill.  By  peti- 
tions, bills,  reports,  and  arguments  informed,  the 
committee  begins  to  frame  its  bill.  At  once  there 
springs  up  an  ever-recurring  difficulty:  the  bill 
must  be  carried  ;  and  the  number  of  members  w^ho 
believe  in  a  River  and  Harbor  bill,  as  in  itself 
meritorious,  is  not  sufficient  to  pass  it."  There  is 
no  such  proof  of  the  national  importance  of  a  bill 
as  an  item  within  it  for  one's  own  district.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  committee  must  select  :  the 
general  distrust  of  harbor  legislation,  the  numer- 
*  See  note  at  the  end  of  the  Essay. 


212  Bsea^s  on  (Bovcinmcnt. 

ous  vetoes,  and  the  fate  of  members  who  persist- 
ed in  voting  for  the  Act  of  1 882,  all  suggest  caution. 
The   problem    before   the   committee    is   always: 
How  much  may  we  put  in   without  offending  the 
newspapers  ?     How  much  may  we  leave  out  with- 
out losing  votes  ?     The  estimates  of  the  engineers 
are  far  greater  than  the  sensitive  press  will  accept, 
and  the  committee  has  a  rough  rule  of  thumb  by 
which  it  agrees  to  appropriate  a  certain  proportion 
of  these  estimates.      In   1887   the  percentage  was 
twenty-five ;  thus  the  amount  of  the  bill  was  fixed 
at  $7,500,000.     We   must   not  suppose  that  each 
work  receives  something ;  some  of  the  places  sug- 
gested are  too  plainly  unworthy  ;   others  require 
too  great  an  expenditure;    the  committee  usually 
throws  out  a  sixth  or  an  eighth  of  the  items  in  the 
engineer's    report.       Furthermore,  the   committee 
does  not  scruple  to  insert  items  never  before  con- 
sidered.    In  this  manner,  in  the  bill  of    1884  was 
included  the  first  appropriation  for  the  Sandy  Bay 
Harbor  of  Refuge  at  Cape  Ann,  which  is  likely  to 
cost    $10,000,000,  and  on  which  there  had  never 
been  an  estimate. 

On  January  8,  1887,  when  all  the  items  had  been 
squeezed  or  expanded  till,  taken  together,  they 
filled  up  the  measure  of  the  committee's  purpose, 
the  committee  reported  its  bill  to  the  House.  The 
date  shows  a  distinct  advance  over  the  previous 
regime.  Four  years  earlier  Mr.  Reagan  did  not 
report  his  bill   till   February  20,  eleven  days  be- 


TRivcr  aiiD  Ibavbor  mil  213 


fore  the  end  of  the  session.  In  addition,  Mr.  Wil- 
lis's accompanying  report  contained  a  courageous 
analysis  of  the  bill.  It  is  not  to  be  presumed 
that  the  bill  had  the  complete  approval  of  any 
member  of  the  committee  :  it  was  simply  the  best 
they  could  offer  with  any  fair  hope  of  its  pass- 
ing. 

The  bantling  had  now  a  name.  It  was  "  H.  R. 
10419,"  and  was  described  as 

"A  BILL 

making  appropriations  for  the  construction,  repair, 
and  preservation  of  certain  public  works  on  rivers 
and  harbors,  and  for  other  purposes." 

The  public  Avorks  were  two  hundred  and  ninety 
in  number,  and  required  a  sum  of  $7,430,000 ;  the 
"  other  purposes  "  refer  to  some  clauses,  directing 
the  manner  in  which  the  work  should  be  carried 
on. 

It  was  a  world  full  of  crafty  enemies  upon  which 
H.  R.  10419  opened  its  eyes.  No  sooner  was  it 
reported  to  the  House  of  Representatives  than  a 
member  gave  notice  that  "  all  points  of  order  are 
reserved  on  that  bill,"  and  when,  after  going 
through  the  usual  recommittal,  it  was  a  second  time 
reported  on  January  11,  there  was  heard  the  same 
formula,  so  suggestive  of  parliamentary  stilettos. 

An  appropriation  bill  is  one  of  the  few  things 
that  the  House  debates  thoroughly.     The  River 


214  JEssags  on  ©ovecnment. 

and  Harbor  Bill  is  peculiarly  open  to  attack  both 
in  principle  and  detail.  In  1886  each  House  gave 
up  ten  sessions  to  that  one  bill — a  total  of  not 
less  than  sixty  hours  of  debate.  There  are  at  least 
five  difTerent  parties  to  the  discussion,  each  of 
which  has  a  peculiar  interest,  and  forwards  it  in  a 
peculiar  way.  The  first  is  made  up  of  chairmen 
of  other  committees,  who  wish  to  bring  forward 
their  own  measures,  instead  of  the  River  and 
Harbor  Bill ;  the  second  includes  all  the  members 
with  speeches,  who  wish  unlimited  general  debate  ; 
next  come  the  men  with  amendments,  who  wish 
only  an  opportunity  to  insert  their  item,  and  as- 
sure the  House  it  will  take  but  a  moment;  the 
fourth  class  is  determined  to  kill  the  bill  by  fili- 
bustering. Finally,  we  have  the  Chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Rivers  and  Harbors  ;  to  him  other 
chairmen  are  Paynim  knights,  to  be  unhorsed  at 
the  first  onset ;  general  debate  is  a  disagreeable 
but  inevitable  waste  of  time,  since  speech-making 
convinces  nobody  ;  amendment  means  the  insertion 
of  jobs,  the  excision  of  necessary  items,  and  the 
disturbance  of  the  nice  adjustment  of  interests 
perfected  by  the  committee ;  as  for  filibusters, 
every  right-minded  chairman  looks  upon  them  as 
piratical  enemies  of  the  human  race,  to  be  driven 
from  the  seas  by  force,  or,  if  necessary,  to  be  taken 
with  guile.  It  is  well  known  that  the  first  morn- 
ing hour  of  each  congressional  sitting  is  given  up 
to  miscellaneous  business ;  and  the  second  usually 


IRivev  anO  IFjaibor  JBill.  215 

to  the  call  of  committees  for  bills.  Most  of  the 
time  remaining  after  these  deductions  on  each  of 
four  days,  January  15,  22,  24,  and  26,  was  devoted 
by  the  House  to  debate  on  the  River  and  Harbor 
Bill ;  and,  contrary  to  the  general  usage,  it  passed 
precisely  as  reported. 

The  first  struggle  was  with  the  Chairman  of  the 
Agricultural  Committee,  who,  on  three  of  the 
four  days,  vainly  strove  to  induce  the  House  to 
take  up  one  of  his  bills  instead  of  H.  R.  10419. 
On  each  day  the  House  went  into  "  Committee 
of  the  Whole  on  the  State  of  the  Union,  to  con- 
sider the  bill  making  appropriations,  etc."  It  is  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole  that  revenue  bills  are  per- 
fected, and  that  most  of  the  parliamentary  spar- 
ring takes  place.  Its  more  simple  rules  and  more 
informal  practice  make  it  a  medium  of  real  debate  ; 
here  amendments  may  be  offered  ;  an  admirable 
rule  permits  five-minute  speeches  on  each  amend- 
ment, and  there  is  no  previous  question.  The 
chairman  of  the  committee  in  charge  of  the  bill 
may  and  frequently  does  find  means  to  cut  off 
debate  ;  but  Mr.  Willis  showed  himself  willing  to 
permit  discussion,  criticism,  and  amendment.  It 
is  true  that  the  first  gun  in  the  battle  was  his  mo- 
tion that  general  debate  be  limited  to  ten  minutes; 
but  he  readily  consented  to  three  hours,  to  be 
divided  between  the  friends  and  opponents  of  the 
bill  as  it  stood. 

In   attempting  to   go   into   committee   on  the 


2i6  Bssags  on  (Bovcniment. 

second  day,  the  filibusters  began  their  tedious 
tactics,  which  were  kept  up  during  a  good  part  of 
three  sittings.  Now  it  was  that  most  exasperating 
device,  the  cry  of  "  no  quorum  "  on  every  vote ;  by 
themselves  abstaining  from  voting,  the  opponents 
of  any  measure  may  prevent  any  amendments  or 
action,  unless  the  friends  of  the  bill  can  keep  within 
call  a  majority  of  all  the  members  of  the  House. 
Now  it  was  a  motion  to  adjourn  ;  now  it  was  the 
tedious  call  of  the  yeas  and  nays  ;  now  it  was  a 
meaningless  amendment ;  now  it  was  a  frivolous 
point  of  order.  The  rules  of  the  House  are,  on  the 
whole,  very  lenient  to  a  minority.  Two  men, 
backed  by  about  twenty  votes,  caused  the  bill  to 
stand  still  for  two  days.  In  vain  did  Chairman 
Willis  remind  them  that  he  had  not  used  his 
power  to  pass  the  bill  under  suspension  of  the 
rules,  because  he  preferred  fair  debate. 

Remonstrance  failing,  he  proceeded  to  fight 
them  in  their  own  fashion.  On  January  24, 
Anderson,  of  Kansas,  had  mustered  fourteen  votes 
on  an  amendment  which  had  several  times  been 
proposed,  and,  indeed,  was  once  inserted  by  the 
House  in  a  river  and  harbor  bill,  viz.  :  that  the 
appropriation  should  be  made  in  a  lump  sum,  to 
be  expended  at  the  discretion  of  the  Secretary  of 
War,  On  the  26th,  before  a  single  detail  had 
been  discussed,  a  friend  of  the  bill  submitted  an 
amendment  in  almost  precisely  the  same  terms. 
The  other  side,  though  apparently  puzzled,  feared 


IRiver  anD  IFjarbor  Jfilll.  217 


the  gift-bearing  Greeks,  and  opposed  the  motion 
on  the  ground  that  it  was  an  "  abdication  of  its 
functions"  by  the  House;  for  the  items  would 
undoubtedly  be  re-inserted  by  the  Senate.  Never- 
theless the  amendment  was  carried,  and  thus  took 
the  place  of  the  original  bill.  There  were  no 
longer  any  items  to  discuss ;  the  Committee  of 
the  Whole  therefore  rose,  and  the  bill  was  declared 
completed,  and  thus  incapable  of  further  amend- 
ment. Mr.  Willis  next  moved  the  previous  ques- 
tion. At  this  stage  the  opponents  of  the  bill  seem 
to  have  seen  the  trap,  and  interposed  points  of 
order.  It  was  too  late  ;  instantly  the  friends  of 
the  bill  whipped  about,  and  voted  in  the  House 
against  the  substitute  which  they  had  just  ac- 
cepted in  committee.  The  effect  was  to  leave  the 
bill  precisely  where  it  stood  when  reported  Janu- 
ary 9,  but  with  this  important  difference:  under 
the  rules  of  the  House  it  could  no  further  be  dis- 
cussed or  amended.  The  House  had  substituted 
the  amendment  for  the  bill,  and  the  bill  for  the 
amendment ;  but  the  process  of  substitution  could 
no  further  go.  If  the  trick  seem  unfair,  it  must  be 
remembered  that  the  House  had  spent  ten  hours 
upon  the  bill,  of  which  time  the  filibusters  had  con- 
sumed at  least  one-half.  Next  day,  January  27,  the 
bill  was  quietly  passed  by  a  vote  of  154  to  95. 

As  the  Senate  carries  on  debate  more  carefully 
than  the  House,  and  as  it  guards  jealously  its  pre- 
rogative of  altering  and  increasing  House  appro- 


2i8  Essass  on  Government. 

priations,  H.  R.  10419  was  now  to  lose  its  form. 
Sent  to  the  Committee  on  Commerce  on  January 
28,  it  was  reported  back  February  17,  but  how 
changed  !  It  was  technically  one  amendment,  but 
practically  a  new  bill.  Nearly  every  item  had 
been  raised,  and  many  new  ones  added  ;  the  sum 
total  was  nearly  $10,300,000,  instead  of  the  orig- 
inal $7,500,000.  No  item  thus  reported  was  struck 
out  by  the  Senate  during  debate :  on  the  contrary, 
amendments  offered  by  individuals,  and  not  by  the 
Committee,  added  $385,000  to  the  total.  A  few 
amendments  were,  however,  ruled  out  of  order 
because  they  proposed  an  appropriation  for  work 
on  which  there  was  no  estimate  ;  or  because  they 
were  "legislation,"  or,  to  use  a  more  familiar 
term,  were  "  riders."  The  characteristic  of  the 
Senate  proceedings  was,  as  it  usually  is,  the  in- 
crease of  appropriations,  and  the  introduction  of 
important  works  not  included  in  the  House  bill. 
Thus  the  Mississippi  received  $1,500,000,  as  against 
$1,250,000  in  the  House  bill  ;  $50,000  was  inserted 
for  the  survey  of  the  Hennepin  Canal ;  and  $150,- 
000  and  $350,000  respectively  for  the  Green  and 
Barren,  and  Portage  Lake  improvements.  The 
Senate  passed  the  bill  as  amended,  February  21, 
and  knowing  by  long  experience  that  the  House 
would  not  concur,  conferees  were  immediately 
appointed.  The  Senate  had  spent  seven  hours 
and  a  half  on  the  bill,  and  had  added  $3,200,000 
to  the  expenditures  which  it  proposed. 


TRivcv  aiiD  Ibarbor  JBill.  219 

As  there  was  tecliniciilly  but  one  amendment  to 
its  original  bill,  the  House  was  not  bound  to  con- 
sider each  item  separately ;  and  when  the  Senate 
bill  appeared  in  the  House,  February  23,  it  was 
hastily  acted  on  by  the  Committee  on  Rivers  and 
Harbors ;  and  they  recommended  "  non-concur- 
rence." On  February  26,  when  but  five  debating 
days  remained,  Mr.  Willis  moved  to  suspend  the 
rules,  to  non-concur,  and  to  appoint  conferees.  The 
filibusters  were  able  only  to  obtain  the  reading  of 
the  bill.  Thirty  minutes'  debate  was  allowed  un- 
der the  rules.  It  was  perfectly  clear  that  the  con- 
ference was  the  only  means  now  by  which  any  bill 
could  be  carried.  The  necessary  two-thirds  vote 
was  obtained,  and  the  conference  authorized  :  as  is 
usual  in  such  cases,  the  chairman  and  one  of  the 
leading  members  of  the  Committee  on  Rivers  and 
Harbors  were  two  of  the  three  House  conferees. 

American  politics  abound  in  ingenious  labor- 
saving  devices,  by  which  the  will  of  a  few  men 
replaces  the  will  of  a  majority.  We  have  the 
nominating  caucus,  the  legislative  caucus,  the 
standing  committee  system,  and  the  conference 
committees.  But  while  a  name  may  be  unex- 
pectedly rubbed  out  of  the  slate  of  the  nominating 
caucus,  the  conference  report  is  seldom  amended  ; 
while  the  legislative  caucus  cannot  always  prevent 
an  appeal  to  the  public  from  dissatisfied  members, 
the  conference  committee  permits  no  minority 
reports  ;  the  most  powerful   standing   committee 


220  Bssa^s  on  (Bovernment. 

may  see  its  carefully  prepared  bill  shattered  by 
amendments  in  conference,  but  the  conference 
committee  frames  a  bill  which  has  never  been  con- 
sidered in  either  House,  and  forces  it  through 
unaltered.  To  crown  the  powers  of  this  extraor- 
dinary body,  the  mightiest  chairman  on  the  floor 
may  be  swept  off  his  legs  when  a  conference  com- 
mittee claims  its  unrestrained  privilege  of  present- 
ing its  report. 

In  theory  the  conference  committee  on  any  sub- 
ject is  empowered  to  consider  only  matters  in  dis- 
agreement between  the  Houses,  and  to  arrive  at 
some  middle  way  in  each.  In  practice  it  often 
frames  practically  a  new  bill,  containing  a  new  dis- 
tribution of  appropriations,  and  inserting  some 
items  never  discussed  in  either  House.  In  this 
way  the  Tariff  Act  of  1883  was  reported,  and  it  is 
a  very  startling  fact  that  a  large  proportion  of  the 
important  acts  of  Congress  are  framed  by  these 
special  joint,  shifting  committees  of  six  men  each, 
sitting  in  unreported  conclave.  It  would  be  inter- 
esting to  know  what  "went  on  between  the  26th 
and  28th  of  February  over  H.  R.  10419,  but  it  is 
possible  to  judge  only  by  the  result ;  the  House  bill 
called  for  $7,500,000;  the  Senate  bill  called  for 
$10,500,000;  the  conference  report  called  for 
$9,913,000.  The  Hennepin  Canal  and  purchase 
of  the  Green  River  and  Portage  Lake  improve- 
ments were  retained,  and  at  least  one  new  item 
had  crept  in. 


IRlvcr  an^  1[3arbov  36111.  221 


Like  many  other  tyrants,  the  conference  com- 
mittee registers  its  will  through  the  forms  of  free 
government.  When,  on  February  28,  the  report 
was  submitted  for  the  action  of  the  House,  there 
was  but  one  way  in  which  it  could  exercise  any 
further  control  over  the  bill  ;  it  might  reject  the 
report  and  simply  order  another  conference.  Four 
successive  conference  committees  had  been  neces- 
sary to  arrange  the  previous  River  and  Harbor  Bill 
of  1886.  The  time  was  too  short  for  such  delay  ;  the 
only  remaining  check  was  to  insist  that  the  report 
should  be  comprehensible,  and  that  it  should  be  read. 
It  is  very  dif^cult  to  secure  either  of  these  simple 
safeguards.  The  report  on  the  bill  of  188 1,  carry- 
ing $1 1,000,000,  set  forth  only  that  the  Senate  had 
receded  from  amendments  numbered  so  and  so, 
and  that  the  House  had  receded  from  its  disagree- 
ments to  amendments  numbered  so  and  so.  Not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  a  rule  of  the  House  re- 
quired with  each  conference  report  "  a  detailed 
statement  sufficiently  explicit  to  inform  the  House 
what  effect  .  .  .  such  amendments  .  .  . 
will  have  upon  the  measure  to  which  they  relate," 
Chairman  Reagan  had  at  that  time  submitted  a 
report  of  nine  and  one-half  lines,  from  which  no 
information  could  be  had  as  to  one  single  item  ; 
and  the  bill  was  passed  in  fifteen  minutes,  under 
the  previous  question.  Chairman  Willis,  on  the 
contrary,  made  it  his  principle  to  present  a  per- 
fectly clear  analysis  of  the  changes  made  by  the 


222  Bssags  on  Government. 


committee.  But  the  clearer  the  conference  reports 
on  appropriation  bills,  the  plainer  is  the  fact  that 
the  House  conferees  habitually  yield  to  the  Sen- 
ate; in  this  case  only  one-fourth  of  the  Senate 
increase  had  been  struck  out.  So  far  as  the  House 
of  Representatives  is  concerned,  conferences  are 
what  plebiscites  in  France  have  been  defined  to  be 
— "  a  device  for  voting  yes."  The  Chairman  of 
the  River  and  Harbor  Committee,  trying  to  please 
delegations  and  members  in  his  committee,  is  one 
individual:  in  the  House,  defending  his  bill,  he  is 
another ;  in  conference,  facing  the  danger  of  fail- 
ure, he  is  another  ;  and  the  three  individuals  have 
different  opinions  as  to  what  constitutes  a  proper 
bill.  It  is  impossible  for  any  chairman  to  see  his 
bill  finally  fail  for  want  of  a  few  concessions ;  and 
he  has  usually  left  room  for  concessions  by  cutting 
his  original  bill  down  below  what  he  expects  to 
see  appropriated.  At  any  rate,  the  House  voted 
to  "  consider  "  the  report.  There  was  only  a  feeble 
flickering  of  filibustering  ;  at  this  stage,  "  consider- 
ation "  meant  only  that  the  previous  question 
should  be  ordered.  It  was  done.  The  final  vote 
was  now  to  be  taken,  and  both  sides  mustered 
their  retainers.  By  a  vote  of  178  to  89  the  House 
agreed  to  the  report  of  the  conference  committee. 
As  the  rules  were  suspended,  the  amended  bill  was 
thus  passed. 

The  day  following,  March  i,  the  Senate  agreed 
to  the  report  of  its  conferees  without  a  division  ; 


IRivci-  anC»  lljaibor  JBill.  223 

the  only  objection  came  from  a  senator  who 
wished  to  see  the  bill  in  print.  Next  day,  March 
2,  it  was  duly  announced  that  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  had  signed  the  bill,  and  that  the  Senate 
Committee  on  Enrolled  Bills  had  found  it  cor- 
rect. 

Here  let  us  stop  a  moment  to  describe  the  ap- 
pearance and  character  of  the  bill  of  which  we  have 
so  long  followed  the  fortunes.  First  comes  the 
enacting  clause;  the  second  paragraph  makes  three 
hundred  and  fifteen  appropriations  for  as  many 
objects  ;  the  third  clause  regulates  the  manner  of 
doing  the  work ;  at  the  end  is  a  general  appropria- 
tion for  eighty  specified  surveys.  The  whole  bill 
is  hedged  about  with  provisos,  the  most  impor- 
tant of  which  are  the  stipulation  for  the  expendi- 
ture of  all  sums  under  the  direction  of  the  Secre- 
tary of  War,  and  the  continuance  of  a  special 
commission  over  the  Mississippi  River  improve- 
ments. In  many  cases  the  appropriation  is  sub- 
divided, as  in  the  following  example  : 

"  Improving  Newtown  Creek  and  bay,  New 
York  :  continuing  improvement,  $10,000  ;  of  which 
$2,500  is  to  be  expended  on  west  branch,  between 
Maspeth  Avenue  and  Dual  Bridge,  at  Grand 
Street  and  Metropolitan  Avenue  ;  $2,500  to  be  ex- 
pended on  main  branch,  between  easterly  Grand 
Street  bridge  and  Metropolitan  Avenue  ;  and  bal- 
ance on  lower  end,  from  Maspeth  Avenue  to  the 
mouth  of  the  creek," 


224  iBsenv.B  on  (Bovcrnmcnt. 

An  analysis  of  the  bill  shows  the  objects  for 
which  appropriations  are  made  to  be  as  follows : 
109  harbors,  8  breakwaters,  3  harbors  of  refuge,  4 
ice  harbors,  13  channels,  162  rivers,  6  removals  of 
obstructions,  2  purchases  of  improvements,  80  sur- 
veys, 8  miscellaneous.  In  forty-four  instances  ap- 
propriations are  for  more  than  one  object.  The 
total  appropriation,  as  divided  among  439  differ- 
ent works,  counts  up  to  $9,913,800. 

After  seventy-one  years  of  improvement  of 
water-ways  by  the  Government  it  is  too  late  to  ask 
whether  it  is  constitutional,  or  even  v/hether  it  is 
expedient,  to  appropriate  money  from  the  national 
treasury  for  works  of  national  benefit.  The  moral 
character  of  H.  R.  104 19  must  be  determined  by 
inquiring  whether  this  particular  bill  was  reason- 
able in  amount ;  whether  the  improvements  for 
which  it  provided  were  likely  to  be  of  general 
benefit ;  whether  they  were  all  useful  to  any  one ; 
and  whether  the  methods  of  administration  were 
wise. 

In  answer  to  the  first  question  it  must  be  said 
that  there  has  been  a  large  increase  of  such  ex- 
penditures since  1822;  but  it  has  not  in  propor- 
tion gone  beyond  the  increase  of  the  general  ex- 
penses of  the  Government;  and  the  bill  for  1887 
is  by  no  means  excessive,  compared  with  those  of 
the  nine  years  previous  and  of  the  five  years  since. 

Was  the  bill  of  general  utility  ?  It  not,  it  was 
from  no  lack  of  effort  to  make  it  cover  the  whole 


mvcx  anO  -ffjaibor  Sill.  225 

area  of  the  United  States.  It  is  a  little  hard  to 
judge  how  useful  the  greater  number  of  works 
may  be ;  for  some  of  the  names  are  not  always 
familiar,  and  several  of  the  places  mentioned  in 
the  bill  modestly  avoid  the  publicity  of  a  gazet- 
teer. Of  course,  every  New  Englander  knows 
precisely  the  location  of  the  "  western  channel  of 
Lynn  Harbor,  leading  to  the  Point  of  Pines,"  and 
sees  the  national  necessity  for  its  receiving  $1,000. 
But  why  should  Hyannis  Harbor  get  $5,000, 
Aransas  Pass  $60,000,  Wappoo  Cut  $2,500,  and 
Upper  Willamette  River  $7,500?  They  all  seem 
of  equal  importance  to  the  great  commerce  of  the 
United  States.  Why  should  Duck  Creek,  Dela- 
ware, have  $3,000,  and  Mispillion  Creek,  in  the 
same  State,  notwithstanding  a  larger  name,  be  put 
off  with  $2,000  ?  Why  should  Currituck  Sound, 
Coanjok  Bay,  and  North  River  Bar,  North  Caro- 
lina, receive  conjointly  only  as  much  as  Content- 
nia  Creek,  near  by  ?  Is  it  fair  that  money  should 
be  appropriated  for  the  Big  Sulphur,  the  Yalla- 
busha,  the  Pamunkey,  the  Chefuncte  River,  and 
Bogue  Phalia,  while  "the  silvery  Charles"  is  put 
off  with  a  pitiful  survey  ?  What  power  other 
than  a  Modern  Language  Association  can  ever 
hope  to  "  improve  "  the  Rivers  Skagit,  Steilaqua- 
mish,  Nootsack,  Snoquomish,  and  Snoqualmie  ? 

There  is  other  than  geographic  evidence  that 
some   of   the    items    in  the   bills   might   well  be 
omitted.     In  January,  1883,  the  Secretary  of  War 
15 


226  Bssags  on  Government. 

made  a  report  in  which  he  designated  in  the  pre- 
vious River  and  Harbor  Bill  ninety-two  items, 
carrying  $862,500,  as  not  of  general  benefit.  His 
items  are  instructive :  in  one  port  the  annual 
revenue  collected  was  $23.25  ;  in  another  there 
was  no  commerce  whatever;  in  another  the  real 
object  of  the  appropriation  was  to  provide  hatch- 
ing grounds  for  the  Fish  Commissioners.  Some 
rivers  were  incapable  of  permanent  improvement  ; 
in  others  the  people  had  themselves  obstructed  the 
stream.  One  creek  lay  wholly  within  the  limits 
of  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  was  an  open  sewer, 
and  was  barred  by  permanent  bridges  ;  all  the  water 
of  another  could,  when  examined,  pass  through  a 
twelve-inch  drain  ;  and  in  another  place  a  quarter 
of  a  million  dollars  had  been  appropriated,  prac- 
tically to  protect  land  from  the  effects  of  hydraulic 
mining.  Thirty-one  of  the  items  thus  reprehended 
reappeared  in  the  bill  of  1887;  and  it  would  be 
impossible  to  say  how  many  new  ones  were  of  the 
same  sort.  The  great  rivers  and  harbors  in  the 
bill  of  1887,  the  improvement  of  which  is  at  once 
seen  to  be  national,  take  up  $5,570,000;  the  re- 
maining $4,200,000  was  not  likely  to  benefit  any- 
one outside  the  limits  of  the  State  within  which 
it  was  spent. 

In  the  present  low  state  of  public  sentiment  as 
to  national  expenditures,  one  might  perhaps  admit 
appropriations  which  do  benefit  some  commerce, 
however  local.     But  our  bill,  like  most  of  its  pre- 


IRircr  anO  -ff^aibor  JBill.  227 

decessors,  contained  provisions  for  the  expenditure 
of  money  which  could  benefit  only  the  owner  of 
the  water-front,  or  the  contractor,  or  the  laborer. 
There  is  an  item  in  H.  R.  104 19  for  "  the  protec- 
tion of  the  Illinois  shore  opposite  the  mouth  of 
the  Missouri  River."  There  is  an  appropria- 
tion of  $300,000  for  the  Missouri,  purposely  dis- 
tributed among  points  where  there  are  railroad 
bridges;  and  the  understanding  was  that  it  should 
be  used  to  protect  from  wash  the  approaches  to 
those  bridges.  Indeed,  why  should  money  be 
spent  upon  the  channel  of  the  Missouri  ?  Sena- 
tor Vest  of  Missouri  frankly  stated  that  from  St- 
Louis  to  St.  Joseph  there  were  but  three  steamers 
plying ;  and  another  member  of  Congress  stated 
that  the  draw  in  one  of  the  Missouri  bridges  had 
been  opened  but  once  in  a  year.  Some  of  the  ap- 
propriations have  left  no  other  trace  than  the 
wages  and  profits  of  people  within  the  district. 

Here  is  a  specific  case,  no  worse  in  principle  than 
a  hundred  others.  Years  ago  the  United  States 
Government  granted  very  valuable  lands  to  aid  in 
the  construction  of  a  canal  connecting  the  Fox  and 
Wisconsin  Rivers.  Having  thus  given  the  water- 
way a  value,  it  then  agreed  to  pay  $145,000  in 
cash  for  the  canal,  leaving,  however,  to  the  origi- 
nal owners  the  right  to  the  water-power.  It  then 
proceeded  to  spend  upward  of  $2,000,000  on  the 
improvement  of  that  water-way.  In  1888,  ac- 
cording to  a  gentleman  living  on  the  line  of  the 


228  Bssafis  on  ©overnmeut. 


canal,  there  was  one  small  steamer  making  regular 
trips,  and  the  only  practical  value  of  the  improve- 
ment was  that  the  Government  kept  up  the  water- 
power  for  private  parties,  who  had  recently  sold  it 
to  other  private  parties  for  $3,000,000.  For  im- 
provements wholly  within  the  State,  Florida  re- 
ceived, in  the  bill  of  1881,  for  each  $1,000  of 
valuation,  $7.16;  Oregon,  $4.09;  New  York,  21 
cents;  Pennsylvania,  10  cents;  and  Iowa,  i  cent. 
It  is  not  too  much  to  say  that,  under  the  bill  of 
1887,  $2,000,000  would  have  been  in  the  end 
absolutely  wasted,  and  $2,000,000  more  would 
have  been  of  local  benefit  only. 

There  remains  one  question.  Is  the  money 
spent  upon  undoubted  national  improvements 
usually  wisely  spent  ?  Such  is  the  intention  of 
Coneress,  but  that  intention  is  not  effected.  The 
first  great  defect  of  the  system  is,  that  too  many 
v/orks  are  undertaken  at  a  time;  every  man  wishes 
to  see  the  sea-wall  built  over  against  his  own 
house.  Of  the  four  hundred  and  thirty-nine 
works  contemplated  by  H.  R.  10419,  in  only 
eight  cases  is  the  appropriation  sufficient  to  com- 
plete the  work ;  the  yearly  dole  is  necessary  in 
order  to  hold  the  yearly  vote ;  whatever  the  esti- 
mate of  the  engineers,  the  application  of  the 
twenty-five  per  cent,  rule  by  the  committee 
makes  it  nearly  impossible  to  secure  the  finishing 
appropriation  for  any  work.  Pressing  works  are 
kept  incomplete,  or  swept  away  because  half  fin- 


IRlver  anD  Ibarbor  mil  229 

ished.  Yet  the  Government  is  constantly  enter- 
ing upon  new  and  costly  enterprises.  The  en- 
gineer reports  no  summary  of  the  probable  expen- 
diture upon  works  now  in  progress;  it  can  hardly 
be  less  than  $200,000,000.  Every  year  new  surveys 
are  introduced,  almost  without  opposition  ;  they 
become  the  basis  of  new  estimates  and  new  ap- 
propriations. 

The  natural  effect  of  indiscriminate  expenditure 
is  to  discourage  private  enterprises.  The  Govern- 
ment not  only  undertakes  works  for  which  private 
capital  might  be  secured,  but  it  has  entered  upon 
the  purchase  of  existing  canals  and  river  improve- 
ments. The  administration  of  the  river  and  har- 
bor improvements  is  honest — the  engineers,  for  the 
most  part  army  officers,  capable ;  but  the  whole 
system  is  crippled  by  the  constant  interference  of 
Congress.  If  that  body  choose  to  begin  a  Henne- 
pin Canal,  involving  twenty  to  thirty  million  dol- 
lars, the  War  Department  has  no  choice  but  to 
carry  it  out.  A  certain  degree  of  discretion  the 
Secretary  does  exercise  ;  he  withholds  money  from 
the  grosser  jobs ;  he  accumulates  balances  unex- 
pended, against  the  year  when  the  bill  may  fail; 
he  insists  on  complete  and  comprehensive  plans 
before  great  works  are  undertaken  ;  but  he  is  sub- 
ject to  calls  for  information  from  either  House, 
and  to  attacks  to  which  he  cannot  reply.  A  sin- 
gle sentence  from  one  of  these  Congressional 
amenities  is  an  illustration  of  what  a  just  public 


23<^  Bssass  on  (Bovernment. 

officer  may  suffer  for  doing  his  duty.  It  appears 
that  the  Secretary  of  War  had  approved  of  the 
removal  of  an  engineer  whom  the  Oregon  people 
liked,  but  in  whom  the  department  lacked  confi- 
dence. A  senator  from  Oregon  therefore  said : 
"  Mr.  President,  I  desire  at  this  time  to  call  the 
attention  of  the  Senate  and  the  country,  and  es- 
pecially of  the  people  of  the  Pacific  Northwest, 
who  are  vitally  interested  in  the  speedy  opening  up 
of  the  Columbia  River  to  free  and  unobstructed 
navigation,  and  who  are,  by  reason  of  their  peculiar 
situation  as  to  transportation  facilities,  in  no  humor 
to  be  trifled  with  by  questionable  arbitrary  action 
or  non-action  upon  the  part  of  executive  officers, 
civil  or  military,  some  of  the  latter  of  whom  have 
grown  in  a  measure  officially  haughty,  arbitrary, 
and  to  a  degree  intolerant,  not  to  say  insolent,  by 
reason  of  having  been  for  years  protected  in  desir- 
able assignments  in  Washington,  mainly,  as  many 
are,  through  the  baneful  instrumentality  of  social 
influence  rather  than  real  merit,  which  in  this 
great  capital  too  often  makes  and  unmakes  men — 
to  the  manner  in  which,  during  the  fall  of  1886, 
the  will  of  Congress  was  set  aside,  and  the  execu- 
tion of  its  act  in  appropriating  $187,500  for  the 
continuance  of  work  on  the  canal  and  locks  at  the 
Cascades  of  the  Columbia  suspended,  unjustifiably, 
to  the  great  detriment  of  the  people's  interest,  and 
to  fix,  if  we  can  from  the  record,  the  just  respon- 
sibility   for   this    high-handed,    unjustifiable,    and 


IRiver  anO  •ff3avbor  3Bm.  231 

wholly  illegal  act  upon  the  official  or  ofificials 
justly  chargeable  therewith," 

The  administrative  commissions,  particularly 
those  in  charge  of  the  Mississippi  and  Missouri 
River  improvements,  fare  no  better,  though  chiefly 
made  up  of  expert  engineers.  Their  plans  are 
rejected,  their  estimates  cut  down,  their  members 
assailed.  The  bill  of  1887  took  pains  to  ignore 
the  Missouri  River  Commission.  In  fact,  all 
commissions  and  all  Cabinet  officers  are  consid- 
ered servants  of  Congress. 

The  Secretary  of  War  is  at  least  not  appointed 
by  or  removable  by  Congress ;  he  serves  the  third 
member  of  the  legislative  body.  We  left  H.  R. 
10419  waiting  for  the  President's  signature;  it 
waits  still.  It  reached  President  Cleveland  on  the 
night  before  adjournment,  together  with  a  hundred 
and  five  other  bills,  the  whole  carrying  seventy-five 
million  dollars  of  appropriations.  In  the  absence  of 
any  power  to  veto  items  in  appropriation  bills,  a 
power  repeatedly  suggested  in  Congress  of  late, 
he  exercised  the  one  possible  check  on  bills  con- 
taining a  mixture  of  good  and  bad  provisions,  and 
on  bills  which  come  in  too  late  for  examination. 
In  refusing  to  sign  it,  he  followed  the  worthy  ex- 
ample of  Jackson,  Tj^ler,  Polk,  Pierce,  and  Arthur; 
as  Congress  adjourned  before  ten  days  had  elapsed, 
it  did  not  become  a  law. 

Let  us  sum  up  the  brief  existence  of  H.  R. 
104 19  :    it  was  prepared  by  a  laborious  committee, 


232  JEssags  on  (Bovcnunent. 

and  introduced  by  an  honest  chairman  ;  it  con- 
tained some  provisions  good  and  useful ;  and  some 
needless,  wasteful,  and  badly  applied.  There  was 
opportunity  for  fair  debate  in  the  House.  The 
Senate  loaded  it  with  amendments,  some  of  them 
iniquitous ;  and  the  House  conferees  yielded  to 
them.  It  was  passed  because  a  majority  of  the 
members  of  both  Houses  desired  specific  appro- 
priations, which  could  not  be  obtained  without 
voting  the  whole  bill.  It  failed  because,  while 
containing  much  for  the  public  good,  it  could  not, 
without  detailed  examinations,  commend  itself 
to  a  man  who  had  no  personal  interest  in-  its 
success.* 

*  This  essay  was  originally  read  before  the  American  Historical 
Association  and  the  American  Economic  Association,  in  joint  ses- 
sion, at  Sanders  Theatre,  Harvard  University,  June  24,  1887.  It 
drew  from  Senator  George  F.  Hoar,  of  Massachusetts,  several 
letters  of  remonstrance  ;  and  the  author  has  made  some  clianges 
in  the  previous  text,  to  correct  errors  of  statement.  Two  army 
officers  have  also  assured  the  author  that  in  their  experience  the 
waste  and  misapplication  of  River  and  Harbor  appropriations  was 
very  small,  and  Mr.  E.  R.  Johnson,  in  an  article  on  River  and  Har- 
bor Bills  (Annals  of  the  American  Academy  of  Political  and  Social 
Science,  II.  782-812),  has  joined  issue  with  the  general  trend  of  the 
above  essay.  On  the  other  hand,  members  of  Congress  and  other 
persons  experienced  in  Congressional  life,  and  persons  who  use  the 
improvements,  assert  that  there  is  great  waste,  and  that  no  one 
acquainted  with  the  facts  supposes  that  the  money  appropriated  for 
many  large  items  of  the  River  and  Harbor  Bill  is  of  permanent 
advantage  to  the  nation,  or  even  to  the  local  users.  A  study  of 
the  debates  on  any  bill  will  convince  the  investigator  at  least  that 
a  large  number  of  members  of  Congress  think  that  there  are  abso- 


X. 


THE   PUBLIC  LAND   POLICY   OF  THE 
UNITED  STATES. 


In  a  letter  of  January  25,  1785,  General  George 
Washington  says  of  the  frontier  lands  :  "  There 
being  no  settlement  or  appropriations  (except  the 
reservation  in  favor  of  the  Virginia  line  of  the 
army),  to  my  knowledge,  in  all  the  country  north- 
west of  the  Ohio."  In  1883,  according  to  an  ofificial 
publication  of  the  Public  Land  Commissioner,  there 
were  "  purely  arable  lands  remaining  in  the  West 
(estimated),  five  million  acres,"  and  "  the  move- 
ment westward  in  search  of  free  Government  lands 
must  soon  cease."  No  more  timely  and  interesting 
service  could  be  performed  than  to  consider  the 
probable  effect  of  the  impending  change.     For  a 

lutely  needless  items.  Tlie  trouble  is  not  so  much  in  "jobs,"  in 
works  for  which  contractors  are  paid  without  fulfilling  the  con- 
tract ;  the  loss  comes  from  putting  money  into  levees  which  will 
continue  to  crumble,  into  ports  where  there  will  never  be  entries, 
and  into  river  improvements  where  there  can  never  be  steamers. 
It  "makes  work  ;"  it  keeps  on  making  work. 

(233) 


234  Bssags  on  Government. 

century,  our  political,  economic,  and  social  relations 
have  been  sensibly  affected  by  the  nearness,  acces- 
sibility, and  cheapness  of  Government  land.  The 
population  of  the  country  has  at  last  overtaken 
our  unsettled  domain.  Henceforth,  our  conditions 
must  be  more  like  those  of  old  and  crowded  coun- 
tries. The  nation  has  had,  enjoyed,  and  spent,  a 
part  of  its  heritage  ;  and  can  never  recover  it. 

To  speculate  upon  the  future  is,  however,  more 
difficult  and  less  profitable  than  to  consider  the 
mistakes  of  the  past.  The  present  essay  is  an 
attempt  to  show  how  it  comes  about  that  the 
arable  lands  of  the  United  States  Government  are 
on  the  verge  of  exhaustion.  Three  questions  will 
be  considered  in  turn — the  acquisition  of  the  lands, 
their  disposition,  and  the  policy  of  the  Govern- 
ment. 

The  first  table  given  in  the  Appendix  to  this 
essay  shows  how  the  United  States  acquired  its 
lands.  The  Government  of  the  United  States 
deals  with  territory  in  three  different  aspects.  As 
a  general  government,  it  exercises  jurisdiction  over 
all  the  area  included  within  the  boundaries  of  the 
United  States  ;  as  a  government,  it  controls,  or 
provides  for  the  control  of,  that  part  of  the  national 
territory  not  organized  into  States ;  as  a  land- 
holder, it  owns  large  tracts  of  lands  within  both 
States  and  Territories.  In  the  first  column  of  the 
table  is  presented  a  statement  of  accessions  of  ter- 
ritory.    The  Congress  of  the  United  States  went 


Ipublic  XanD  poUcv).  235 

into  the  business  of  governing  the  nation,  March 
I,   1781,  with  819,815   square  miles  of  territory; 
and  this  area  was  acknowledged  to  belong  to  the 
United  States  by  the  treaty  of  1783.     The  first 
increase  of  territory  came  in   1803.     The   Interior 
Department  has  committed  itself,  in  its  land  and 
census    publications,    to   the   statement   that    the 
Louisiana  purchase  of  that  year  included  Oregon. 
It  is  more  in  accordance  with  the  historic  truth  to 
say  that  our  title  to  Oregon,  south  of  the   Co- 
lumbia, dates  from  the  Lewis  and  Clarke  expedition 
of   1805.     The  United  States,   therefore,  secured 
877,268  square  miles  in   1803,  and   225,948  square 
miles  in  1805.     In  1812,  acts  of  Congress  extended 
our  jurisdiction   over   about   9,740   square   miles, 
claimed  by  Spain  in  West  Florida.     The  Florida 
purchase   of    1819    added    54,240    square    miles. 
Texas  brought  us   262,290  square  miles  in  1845. 
Here,  again,  the  Government  publications  conflict 
with  history.     New   Mexico  was  never  a  part  of 
Texas,  and  our  title  to  that  region  rests  upon  the 
same  basis  as  that  to  California :  it  was  a  part  of 
the  conquest  of  the  Mexican  War.     In    1846,  our 
title  to  the  58,880  square  miles  north  of  the  Co- 
lumbia was  acknowledged  by  England,     In   1853, 
we  bought  47,330  square  miles  of  Mexico.     Finally, 
in  1867,  Russia  ceded  to  us  Alaska,  with  577,390 
square  miles.     To  speak  in  round   numbers,  the 
original  area  of  the  United  States  was  doubled  by 
the  Louisiana  cession ;  almost  as  much  was  added 


23^  BsBa^B  on  Government. 

out  of  Mexican  territory;  and  Oregon  and  Alaska 
together  make  up  the  fourth  quarter  of  the  present 
area. 

The  area  embraced  in  the  Territories  has  varied 
ahnost  from  year  to  year.  Between  the  years  1784 
and  1802,  cessions  by  the  States  had  given  to  the 
United  States  405,482  square  miles ;  but,  besides 
two  little  tracts  ceded  by  the  United  States  to 
Pennsylvania  and  Georgia,  the  creation  of  new 
States,  beginning  with  Tennessee  in  1796,  with- 
drew large  regions  from  the  Territorial  status.  Each 
annexation  increased  the  Territories  for  the  time 
being  :  each  admission  of  a  State  again  reduced  it. 
At  present,  the  Territories  cover  919,992  square 
miles,  and  the  States  2,581,507,  From  1820  to 
1889,  the  area  of  the  States  taken  together  was 
never  very  far  from  one-half  of  the  total  area  of 
the  whole  United  States.  At  present  the  status 
of  the  territory  seems  likely  speedily  to  disappear, 
except  in  Alaska  and  perhaps  the  Indian  Territory. 
'  That  part  of  the  land  within  our  boundaries 
which  belongs  to  the  nation  has  by  the  Land  Of^ce 
been  named  the  Public  Domain.  The  area  is  a 
ratio  having  two  variables  :  at  intervals,  it  is  in- 
creased by  cessions  or  annexations  ;  every  year 
since  1799,  it  has  been  diminished  by  sale  or  gift. 
At  the  beginning  of  the  existence  of  the  Confed- 
eration, in  1 781,  the  Government  did  not  control 
or  own  a  single  acre  of  land.  Every  part  of  the 
United  States  was  claimed  by  some  State,  and 


Ipublic  ILanD  ipolics.  237 

there  were  regions  covered  by  two  or  even  three 
claims.  With  all  its  defects  and  its  imbecility,  the 
Confederation  did  one  great  service  to  the  nation 
and  to  posterity  :  it  succeeded  in  prevailing  upon  a 
number  of  the  States  to  waive  their  claims  in  behalf 
of  the  General  Government.  March  i,  1784,  the 
cession  of  Virginia  gave  to  the  United  States  undis- 
puted title  to  a  large  part  of  the  region  north  of 
the  Ohio  River.  The  previous  cession  of  New 
York,  and  the  later  cessions  of  Massachusetts  and 
Connecticut,  1785  and  1786,  completed  the  title 
to  the  vast  tract  now  occupied  by  six  populous 
States.  In  the  South,  the  process  was  slower. 
South  Carolina  ceded  her  claim  in  1787,  North 
Carolina  in  1790.  It  was  not  till  1802,  that 
Georgia  released  her  hold  upon  the  region  now 
comprised  in  the  States  of  Alabama  and  Missis- 
sippi. 

An  inspection  of  Table  I.  of  the  Appendix  to 
this  essay  will  show  that  the  United  States  received 
title  to  less  land  than  was  included  in  the  cessions. 
This  was  because  in  every  case  there  were  reserva- 
tions. Thus,  Connecticut  kept  for  herself  the 
Western  Reserve.  Virginia  liberally  provided  a 
bounty  tract  for  her  Revolutionary  soldiers  north 
of  the  Ohio  River.  North  Carolina,  with  a  great 
flourish  of  trumpets,  yielded  the  region  now  in- 
cluded within  the  State  of  Tennessee  ;  but  it  was 
found  later  that  the  whole  region  was  covered  by 
State   land   warrants,   so  that  the  United   States 


238  Essags  on  ©ovenimcnt. 


never  actually  held  an  acre  there  by  original  title. 
In  addition  to  the  reservations  for  the  benefit  of 
States  and  their  protege's,  every  tract  which  has 
come  to  the  Government  has  been  reduced 
by  the  claims  of  previous  residents  :  the  policy 
of  the  Government  has  been  to  leave  actual 
occupants  of  small  estates  undisturbed,  and  to 
construe  liberally  the  grants  of  previous  govern- 
ments. The  Indian  occupancy  has  also  always 
been  recognized  as  something  which  must  be  pur- 
chased before  the  United  States  gained  full  title. 
Texas  retained  the  whole  body  of  public  lands 
within  her  limits.  With  the  two  exceptions  of 
Indian  and  Texan  lands,  the  United  States  has 
had,  since  1802,  to  consider  only  private  claims. 
As  more  than  one-half  of  the  whole  present  terri- 
tory of  the  United  States  (1,865,457  out  of  3,501,- 
509  square  miles)  has  once  been  Spanish,  the  land 
titles  under  the  grants  and  laws  of  Spain  have  been 
a  troublesome  thorn  in  the  flesh  of  successive  Land 
Commissioners.  No  exact  record  appears  of  the 
precise  quantities  of  land  confirmed  to  claimants 
in  California,  New  Mexico,  Louisiana,  and  Florida, 
but  upwards  of  fifty  thousand  square  miles  have 
doubtless  never  entered  the  public  domain.  The 
general  policy  of  the  Government  is  to  require  a 
claimant  under  Spanish  grants  to  prove  his  title. 
Great  hardship  has  often  ensued,  and  many  grants 
are  still  unconfirmed  by  the  United  States. 

If  the  Government  had  never  parted  with  any  of 


Ipubllc  XaiiD  ^oUc^.  239 


the  lands  to  which  it  had  undoubted  title,  the  na- 
tion would  now  have,  including  Alaska,  a  patri- 
mony of  2,708,388  square  miles.  This  area  is  but 
little  less  than  that  of  the  whole  United  States, 
excluding  Alaska.  The  fourth  column  of  Table  I. 
shows  the  amount  of  land  in  possession  of  the 
United  States  from  year  to  year.  It  will  be  no- 
ticed that  since  1803  we  have  had  more  land  than 
exclusive  territory.  A  very  considerable  part  of 
the  public  domain  lies  therefore  within  the  limits 
of  States.  Another  significant  fact,  shown  by  the 
same  table,  is  the  rapid  melting  away  of  the  area 
gained  by  each  cession  since  1805.  We  had  less 
land  in  1846  than  before  the  Florida  and  final 
Oregon  annexations  ;  the  area  of  Alaska  barely 
made  good  the  acreage  lost  since  1848,  and  a 
new  Texas  would  not  restore  the  public  lands 
parted  with  since  1880.  Let  us  look  more  closely 
into  the  process  by  which  the  United  States 
has  divested  itself  of  more  than  a  million  square 
miles. 

Table  II.,  in  the  Appendix,  shows  the  number 
of  acres  disposed  of  in  each  year,  classified  under 
four  heads,  which,  roughly  speaking,  account  each 
for  one-fourth  of  the  total.*  First  in  amount  and 
importance  are  the  sales.  The  history  of  the  public 
lands  happens  to  fall  into  five  tolerably  distinct 

*  The  generalizations  in  this  part  of  the  essay  are  based  on  a 
study  of  the  Land  Office  returns  down  to  1883,  and  it  has  not 
been  possible  to  reconstruct  all  the  tables  to  1892. 


240  jBsen^e  on  ©ovcinment. 

periods,  each  of  about  twenty  years.  From  1784 
to  1 801,  the  policy  of  the  Government  was  to  sell 
lands  in  large  quantities  by  special  contract :  the 
result  was  an  average  sale  of  less  than  one  hun- 
dred thousand  acres  yearly.  In  1800  was  inaugu- 
rated a  new  system  of  sales,  in  small  lots,  on  credit: 
about  eighteen  millions  of  acres  were  thus  taken, 
but  more  than  two  and  a  half  millions  subse- 
quently reverted  to  the  Government  under  relief 
acts.  In  the  middle  of  1820  began  a  system  of 
sales  for  cash,  in  lots  to  suit  purchasers.  Seventy- 
six  million  acres  were  sold  in  twenty  years  ;  but  of 
this  large  quantity  one-half  passed  out  of  the  hands 
of  the  Government  in  the  two  years  preceding  the 
panic  of  1837.  After  that  revulsion,  the  pre-emp- 
tion system  was  adopted,  by  which  the  most  desir- 
able lands  were  reserved  for  actual  settlers,  at  a 
low  price.  Except  in  the  years  1856-57,  the  sales 
were  steady,  and  kept  pace  with  the  growth  of  the 
West.  The  homestead  system  carried  the  princi- 
ple of  "  land  for  the  landless  "  still  further,  and 
cut  down  cash  sales  to  an  average  of  a  million  acres 
a  year.  Since  1880,  pre-emptions  have  been 
resorted  to  again,  in  many  cases  for  fraudulent  pur- 
poses; and  the  total  sales  average  almost  four  mill- 
ion acres  a  year.  At  present,  lands  are  classified 
by  the  Land  Office  as  agricultural,  saline,  town 
site,  mineral,  coal,  stone  and  timber,  and  desert 
lands.  From  1854  to  1862  there  was  a  further 
class   of   "  graduated  lands."     These    were   tracts 


Ipublic  Xan?  ipoHcig.  241 


which  had  long  remained  unsold,  and  were  offered 
to  abutters  at  very  low  prices.  The  minimum 
price  for  ordinary  lands  has  for  many  years  been 
$1.25  per  acre.  Timber  lands  and  lands  reserved 
from  railroad  land-grants  are  sold  at  the  "  double 
minimum  "  of  $2.50  an  acre  ;  mineral  lands  are 
valued  at  $2.50  and  $5  an  acre;  coal  lands,  at 
$10  and  $20  an  acre. 

It  would  seem,  therefore,  as  though  the  sale  of 
a  hundred  and  ninety-two  million  acres  must  have 
brought  in  a  handsome  sum  to  the  Government. 
As  long  ago  as  1787,  Thomas  Jefferson  wrote  :  "  I 
am  very  much  pleased  that  our  Western  lands  sell 
so  successfully.  I  turn  to  this  precious  resource  as 
that  which  will,  in  every  event,  liberate  us  from 
our  domestic  debt,  and  perhaps,  too,  from  our  for- 
eign one."  It  is  true  that  the  proceeds  of  the  pub- 
lic lands  did  eventually  wipe  out  the  last  vestiges 
of  the  debt  which  had  existed  in  1787.  It  is  true 
that  the  lands  had,  up  to  June  30,  1883,  brought 
into  the  Treasury  of  the  United  States  the  smart 
amount  of  two  hundred  and  thirty-three  million 
dollars.  It  is  equally  true  that,  except  for  the 
period  from  1830  to  1840,  the  lands  have  been  a 
drain  upon  our  finances.  At  the  end  of  the  finan- 
cial year  1882-83  the  Government  was  out  of 
pocket,  so  far  as  cash  outlay  and  receipts  are  meas- 
ures of  the  value  of  the  lands,  in  the  sum  of  more 
than  one  hundred  and  twenty-six  millions  of  dol- 
lars. 

16 


242  JEssa^s  on  ©ovenimcnt. 

The  first  great  item  of  expense  is  the  extinguish- 
ment of  the  Indian  claim  to  ownership.  Since 
1 78 1  the  United  States  Government  has  recog- 
nized the  right  of  occupancy,  but  has  asserted  its 
sole  prerogative  to  acquire  Indian  lands.  First  and 
last,  up  to  the  end  of  the  fiscal  year  1882-83,  it 
had  paid  two  hundred  and  nine  millions  of  dollars 
for  the  interest  of  the  Indian  in  his  lands.  There 
have  been  grave  acts  of  injustice  in  the  manner  of 
negotiation  and  of  payment,  but  no  inferior  race 
ever  received  more  consideration  at  the  hands  of 
the  treaty-making  power.  The  Indians  are  still 
in  possession  of  reservations  comprising  some  of 
the  most  favored  lands  in  the  West  and  embracing 
more  than  a  hundred  million  acres  of  land.  A 
second  source  of  expense  has  been  the  purchase- 
money  paid  for  all  the  annexations  since  1802, 
except  that  of  Oregon.  The  items  in  the  cate- 
gory taken  together  make  an  outlay  of  upwards  of 
eighty-eight  millions.  Surveys  and  expenses  of 
disposition  add  fifty-five  millions.  If  a  strict  ac- 
count were  to  be  made  up,  there  should  be  added 
to  the  expenditure  a  proportion  of  the  general  ex- 
penses of  maintaining  the  government  and  the 
whole  cost  of  the  Mexican  war. 

Unsatisfactory  as  is  the  financial  result  of  our 
public-land  policy,  we  must  reflect  that  the  sales 
account  for  but  little  more  than  a  fourth  part  of 
the  total  disposition.  Perhaps  we  shall  find  the 
remainder  so  used  as  to  give  some  indirect  benefit 


Ipubllc  Xan?  ipollc^.  243 


which  cannot  be  reckoned  in  dollars  and  cents.     In 
the  second  column  of  Table  II.  is  a  partial  record 
of  the  grants  made  to  individuals.     The  twenty- 
year  periods  are  again  distinctly  marked.     In  the 
first  four  decades  two  sorts  of  grants  are  apparent. 
In  1796,  and  later,  provision  was  made  for  the  ful- 
filment of  long-standing  promises  to  the  Revolu- 
tionary troops  and  to  the  Canadian  refugees  who 
had  taken  sides  with  the  patriots.     At  the  same 
time,  Congress  made  gifts  of  small  tracts  of  land 
to  individuals  who  had  performed  special  services 
to  the  republic.     Thus,  Lafayette  received  a  town- 
ship of  land  in   1824;  and  in   1843  a  square  mile 
was  voted  to  one  Lowe  for  "  his  gallantry  and  peril 
in  the  rescue  of  an  American  brig  from  the  hands 
of  pirates."     A  very  few  grants  were  made  to  edu- 
cational   and  charitable  institutions;   thus,  Jeffer- 
son College,  Mississippi,  and  the  deaf  and  dumb 
asylums  of  Kentucky  and  Connecticut,  were  each 
endowed  with  a  township.     Congress  has  always 
shown   a  singular  moderation    in   making   special 
grants,  perhaps  because  its  general  gifts   were  so 
magnificent.     Of  the  ten  million  acres  given  away, 
down  to  1840,  the  greater  part  was  in   reward  for 
services  in  the  Revolutionary  War  and  War   of 
1812.     For  services  in  the  Mexican  War  the  Gov- 
ernment appropriated  about  sixty  millions  of  acres. 
Another  form  of  gift  is  the  so-called  "donations." 
From    1842  to    1854    acts   were    passed    granting 
quarter   sections   of  land  to  actual  settlers    who 


244  JEesa^s  on  ©ovcrnmcnt. 


would  reside  on  dangerous  frontiers.     About  three 
millions  of  acres  have  been  claimed  under  these 
conditions.      The   homestead  act    of    1862    intro- 
duced a  new  principle  into  the  public-land  system  : 
it  provided  not  only  for  the  reservation  of  farms 
for  actual  settlers,  but  it  proposed  to  give  land  to 
all  heads  of  families,  citizens  of  the  United  States 
or  intending  to  become  such.     The  effect  of  the 
act  has  been  threefold.     Under  its  provisions  and 
those  of  the  similar  timber-culture  act  of  1873,  im- 
migration has  been  stimulated,  the  revenue  from 
the  lands  was  for  many  years  almost  cut  off,  and 
one   hundred    and    fifty    millions   of   acres    have 
passed  from  the  public  domain  into  private  hands. 
In  some  respects,  the  rapid  settlement  of  the  West, 
which  has  been  greatly  favored  by  the  generous 
policy  of  the  Government,  has  undoubtedly  con- 
duced to  the  welfare  of  the  country,  and  has  made 
possible  our  elaborate  systems  of   transportation 
and  distribution  on  a  large  scale.     It  is,  neverthe- 
less, a  question  whether  the  present  generation,  as 
well  as  posterity,  might  not  have  been  equally  pros- 
perous if  the  Government  had  made  the   condi- 
tions of  acquirement  more  rigorous. 

To  ascribe  the  depletion  of  our  reserves  of  land 
to  the  bounty  and  homestead  acts  is  unjust  :  the 
United  States  has  given  to  the  States  almost  as 
much  as  to  individuals.  Most  of  the  original  six- 
teen States  (including  Vermont,  Kentucky,  and 
Tennessee)  were  in  possession  of  unoccupied  lands 


Ipublic  5LanD  poKcg.  245 

in  1802.  The  new  States  as  they  have  been  ad- 
mitted have  received  large  gifts  of  three  kinds. 
To  most  of  them  have  been  granted  from  one  to 
six  townships  of  saline  lands,  an  aggregate  of  half 
a  million  acres.  For  all  admitted  to  the  Union 
previous  to  1850  have  been  reserved  one  thirty- 
sixth  of  the  public  domain  within  their  limits,  for 
school  purposes.  The  fortunate  States  which  have 
come  in  since  1850  receive  one-eighteenth,  and  a 
like  amount  is  reserved  in  each  of  the  Territories, 
except  the  Indian  Territory  and  Alaska.  The  total 
thus  set  aside  is  about  sixty-eight  million  acres. 
For  each  of  the  new  States  and  Territories  has  also 
been  reserved  a  tract  of  from  two  to  four  townships 
for  a  university — a  total  of  more  than  a  million 
acres.  In  1862  Congress  granted  to  each  State  in 
the  Union,  lands  proportioned  to  its  representation 
in  Congress,  for  an  agricultural  college.  Nearly 
ten  million  acres  were  thus  appropriated.  It  is  at 
least  doubtful  whether  a  system  of  endowed  public 
schools  is  desirable.  Many  of  the  States  have 
squandered,  lost,  or  misused  the  lands  acquired  for 
educational  purposes.  In  others  the  people  decline 
to  tax  themselves  for  school  purposes,  and  rely 
wholly  on  the  fund.  But  it  is  even  worse  with  other 
formsof  grants  to  States.  In  1841,  a  time  of  reck- 
less disposition  of  the  lands,  a  grant  of  five  hundred 
thousand  acres  was  made  to  each  of  seventeen  of  the 
States,  for  internal  improvements.  The  largest 
single  gift  made  to  the  States  up  to  that  time  was 


246  Bssags  on  ©overunicnt. 

included  in  the  swamp-land  grants  of  1849  and  sub- 
sequent years.  All  the  "swamp  and  overflowed 
lands  "  within  the  limits  of  any  State  were  granted 
to  that  State.  It  was  expected  that  the  sale  of  a 
part  would  pay  the  expense  of  reclaiming  the 
whole.  It  does  not  appear  that  any  great  improve- 
ments have  been  made  by  the  States;  and  the 
United  States  is  now  spending  large  sums  in  build- 
ing levees,  to  protect  regions  thus  presented  to  the 
States  in  1850.  When  the  six  new  States  were 
admitted  into  the  Union  in  1890  and  1891  (?),  they 
received  the  most  magnificent  endowment  ever 
bestowed  on  republican  commonwealths.  Part  of 
the  area  was  reserved  school  lands ;  part  of  it  was 
in  the  form  of  new  gifts  for  public  buildings,  uni- 
versities and  other  purposes  :  the  whole  amounted 
to  twenty-three  million  acres,  and  the  gift  was 
accompanied  by  a  promise  that  no  part  should  be 
sold  at  less  than  ten  dollars  an  acre. 

Throughout  the  history  of  the  country  there  has 
prevailed  the  double  error  that  a  gift  of  land  cost 
the  Government  nothing,  yet  was  of  very  great 
value  to  the  recipient.  Upon  the  land  that  is  of 
any  worth,  the  United  States  has  spent  money  for 
surveys  and  administration  ;  yet  the  States  and 
other  grantees  have  found  it  hard  to  turn  the  gifts 
into  money.  A  great  part  of  the  educational 
grants  have  realized  not  more  than  a  dollar  an 
acre.  It  would  in  many  respects  be  preferable  for 
the  Government  to  appropriate  the  proceeds  of  the 


Ipublic  XanD  policy,  247 

lands  rather  than  to  give  the  disposal  of  the  soil 
to  the  States.  A  distribution  act  was  passed  in 
1 841,  by  which  the  net  amount  received  for  public 
lands  was  to  be  paid  to  the  States ;  but  it  was  re- 
pealed so  speedily  that  only  about  seven  hundred 
thousand  dollars  was  thus  distributed.  A  much 
larger  sum  has  accumulated,  and  has  been  paid  to 
the  States,  under  the  "  two,  three,  and  five  per 
cent,  funds,"  By  agreement  with  each  State  as  it 
has  entered  the  Union,  the  United  States  consents 
to  pay  over  a  proportion  of  the  net  proceeds  of  the 
lands  within  that  State.  More  than  seven  million 
dollars  have  been  allowed  under  this  provision. 
The  deduction  is  not  strictly  a  gift,  since  the  States 
in  return  bind  themselves  not  to  tax  public  land 
till  it  has  been  five  years  in  the  hands  of  a  private 
owner. 

In  theory,  the  lands  appropriated  for  internal 
improvements  of  various  kinds  have  also  been  sac- 
rificed in  order  to  make  the  remainder  more  valu- 
able. The  Ohio  five  per  cent,  fund  in  1802  was 
intended  to  be  applied  to  the  construction  of  the 
Cumberland  road,  which  was  to  be  the  great  ave- 
nue for  purchasers  and  settlers  from  the  Atlantic 
coast.  This  was  the  beginning  of  the  system  of 
internal  improvement  at  the  expense  of  the  nation  ; 
but,  in  practice,  Congress  built  the  road  out  of 
general  funds.  It  was  not  till  1827,  four  years 
after  the  first  river  and  harbor  bill,  that  direct 
grants  of  lands  were  made  in  aid  of  internal  im- 


248  Essags  on  Government. 

provements.  The  new  and  momentous  policy 
began  with  grants  for  canals.  Between  1827  and 
1850  about  three  million  acres  had  been  appropri- 
ated to  this  purpose,  principally  to  secure  the  com- 
pletion of  the  system  connecting  the  lakes  with 
the  Ohio  and  Mississippi.  The  jealousy  caused 
by  the  action  of  Congress  brought  about  the  com- 
jorehensive  grant  of  five  hundred  thousand  acres  to 
each  "  public  land  State,"  to  which  reference  has 
already  been  made.  But  the  most  familiar  form 
of  grants  for  internal  improvements  dates  from 
1850.  By  that  year  the  railroad  system  had  been 
extended  so  far  west  as  to  penetrate  large  tracts  of 
unsold  lands.  Congress  aided  the  extension  of 
the  system  by  assigning  to  the  States  of  Illinois, 
Alabama,  and  Mississippi  nearly  four  million  acres, 
to  be  used  toward  the  construction  of  the  Illinois 
Central  and  Mobile  and  Ohio  lines,  reaching  from 
Chicago  to  the  Gulf.  Between  1850  and  1872 
about  eighty  similar  land-grants  were  made.  The 
principal  lines  of  communication  in  Minnesota  and 
Iowa,  and  important  roads  in  Wisconsin,  Illinois, 
Missouri,  Arkansas,  Louisiana,  Alabama,  Missis- 
sippi, and  Florida,  were  subsidized.  In  1862  a 
new  problem  presented  itself.  It  became  a  politi- 
cal necessity  to  lay  a  line  of  railroad  across  the  con- 
tinent. Between  Iowa  and  California  there  were  no 
States  to  which  the  grant  could  pass.  Congress, 
therefore,  promised  a  subsidy  of  land  to  corpora- 
tions which  undertook  to  build  the  Pacific  railroads. 


Ipublic  XanO  ipoKcg.  249 

In  the  ten  years  following,  some  twenty -three 
similar  grants  were  made,  in  almost  all  cases  for 
roads  running  east  and  west,  and  intended  to  form 
links  in  transcontinental  lines.-  To  satisfy  the 
terms  of  the  acts,  about  one  hundred  and  fifty-five 
millions  of  acres  would  be  necessary.  Several 
companies  never  built  their  roads,  and  earned  no 
grant ;  others  completed  the  work  after  the  pre- 
scribed time.  In  a  few  cases  Congress  has  for- 
mally declared  the  grant  void,  and  has  restored  the 
land  to  the  public  domain.  A  few  grants  for 
canals  and  for  wagon  roads,  between  the  years 
1863  and  1872,  make  up  the  three  remaining  mill- 
ions of  the  grand  total  promised  by  the  Govern- 
ment— a  total  of  a  hundred  and  sixty-two  millions 
of  acres.  Out  of  this  amount  only  about  fifty  mill- 
ions of  acres  had  been  patented  to  the  States  and 
companies  in  1883.  During  the  ten  years  follow- 
ing, there  have  been  legal  reversions  to  the  Govern- 
ment of  fifty  million  acres  out  of  unpatented  land- 
grants  ;  and  large  tracts  are  still  disputed. 

To  express  the  disposition  of  the  public  lands 
in  familiar  terms,  the  United  States  had  up  to 
1883  parted  with  a  tract  equal  to  its  whole  area 
east  of  the  Mississippi  River,  added  to  the  States 
of  Missouri,  Iowa,  and  Minnesota  (west  of  the 
river).  The  acreage  sold  was  a  little  more  than  the 
combined  areas  of  the  New  England  and   Middle 

*  In  Donaldson's  Public  Domain,  949,  will  be  found  two  excel- 
lent graphic  maps  of  the  land-grants. 


250  jBBsn^e  on  Government. 

States,  with  Ohio,  Indiana,  and  Michigan.  The 
coast  States  from  Delaware  to  Florida  (including 
Maryland)  represent  the  area  of  gifts  to  individu- 
als. The  remainder  of  the  South,  east  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi, closely  approximates  to  the  area  of  grants 
to  States.  The  remainder  of  the  Northwest,  with 
Missouri,  Iowa,  and  Minnesota,  may  stand  for  the 
internal  improvement  grants. 

Yet  so  vast  is  the  area  of  the  country  that  the 
Government  might  repeat  its  sales  and  gratuities, 
acre  for  acre,  without  exhausting  its  reserves  of 
land  in  the  West  alone.  In  spite  of  the  fact  that 
the  States  had  in  the  beginning,  or  have  retained, 
five  hundred  million  acres,  and  that  the  United 
States  has  parted  with  seven  hundred  and  thirty 
million  acres,  the  public  domain  still  comprises 
nearly  a  thousand  million  acres.  The  real  signifi- 
cance of  the  present  alarm  about  the  disappearance 
of  the  public  lands,  lies  in  the  fact  that  the  greater 
part  of  the  unsold  lands  are  either  reserved  for  the 
Indians  or  are  unfit  for  ordinary  tillage.  Upon  the 
best  vacant  lands — amounting  to  about  a  hundred 
millions  of  acres — the  Indians  are  still  seated. 
The  area  can  be  reduced  by  judicious  and  costly 
treaties  ;  but  it  amounts  only  to  about  three  hun- 
dred acres  per  head  ;  and,  if  the  occupants  should 
take  up  land  in  severalty  to  the  amount  of  three 
hundred  and  twenty  acres  for  each  head  of  a  fam- 
ily, they  would  still  retain  thirty  million  acres  of 
valuable    lands ;  they  could   not   be   dispossessed 


Ipublic  ILanD  policy.  251 

without  such  injustice  as  would  rouse  the  nation. 
Experts  in  the  Land  Office  assure  us  that,  making 
all  deductions  and  allowances,  the  remaining  lands 
are  worth  upward  of  a  thousand  millions  of  dollars. 
There  is  no  evidence  in  the  past  policy  of  the  Gov- 
ernment for  believing  that  we  shall  actually  net 
one-tenth  of  that  amount.  The  greater  part  of  the 
region  is  officially  classified  as  "  Desert  Lands," 
and  is  for  sale  in  tracts  of  six  hundred  and  forty 
acres,  at  a  dollar  and  a  quarter  an  acre.  Noth- 
ing but  the  temporary  increase  of  pre-emption  has 
enabled  the  Land  Office  at  present  to  pay  its  run- 
ning expenses  out  of  its  income.  The  golden  time 
is  past;  our  agricultural  land  is  gone;  our  timber 
lands  are  fast  going  ;  our  coal  and  mineral  lands 
will  be  snapped  up  as  fast  as  they  prove  valuable. 
There  is  no  great  national  reserve  left  in  the  public 
lands  unless  there  should  be  a  change  of  policy. 
Should  disaster  overtake  us,  we  must  depend,  like 
other  nations,  on  the  wealth  of  the  people,  and  not 
on  that  of  the  Government. 

It  is,  of  course,  true  that  the  lands  are  still  in 
existence,  and  have  been  made  many  times  more 
valuable  by  the  labor  of  the  occupants.  It  is 
further  true  that  large  quantities  of  vacant  land 
are  for  sale  by  the  railroads  and  other  grantees. 
There  is  no  immediate  danger  of  a  land  famine. 
There  is  abundant  cause  for  criticism  of  the  system 
adopted  by  the  United  States,  but  it  should  right- 
fully be  directed  rather    against    the    manner  in 


252  jE63n>Q3  on  Government. 

which  the  laws  have  worked  than  against  their 
purpose.  Since  1841,  the  lands  have  nominally- 
been  reserved  for  actual  settlers ;  but  practice  has 
shown  grave  defects  in  the  settlement  laws — defects 
which  Congress  has  no  will  to  remedy.  No  man 
can  legally  pre-empt  land  or  take  up  a  homestead 
more  than  once;  but  this  limitation  is  very  diffi- 
cult to  guard,  and  perjury  and  fraud  are  alarmingly 
frequent.  No  one  man  can  legally  acquire  more 
than  eleven  hundred  and  twenty  acres  of  land  from 
the  Government,  if  any  one  else  wants  the  land  ; 
a  hundred  and  sixty  acres  as  a  pre-emption,  as  much 
more  as  a  homestead,  another  quarter-section  as  a 
tree  claim,  and  a  section  of  six  hundred  and  forty 
acres  as  a  desert-land  claim.  Actually,  single  in- 
dividuals and  companies  own  large  estates,  which 
a  few  years  ago  were  in  the  hands  of  the  Govern- 
ment. 

The  accumulation  of  the  large  tracts  is  often 
brought  about  by  fraud,  but  much  oftener  through 
the  mistaken  generosity  of  the  Government  or 
through  defective  land  laws.  It  is  not  always 
necessary  to  hire  men  fraudulently  to  take  up  land 
for  the  company.  In  Texas,  the  State  has  sold  its 
lands  in  its  own  way,  often  in  large  blocks.  The 
school-lands  and  the  scrip  for  bounty  warrants  have 
legally  been  used  for  locating  wide  extending  estates. 
The  railroad  lands,  although  not  in  compact  tracts, 
can  be  used  as  a  nucleus  for  a  large  accumulation ; 
and,  in  a  country  where  land  is  cheap  and  money 


Ipublic  XanO  ipcllcx?.  253 

dear,  the  patient,  long-headed  capitalist  can  buy  up 
valuable  claims  in  a  legitimate  manner.  The  chief 
source  of  the  present  trouble  in  the  West  lies  in 
the  fact  that  the  Government  never  recognized  that 
grazing  land  must  be  sold  and  occupied  under  dif- 
ferent conditions  from  ordinary  arable  lands.  The 
first  comers  have  been  allowed  to  take  up  the 
water-fronts.  Any  comprehensive  system  of  irri- 
gation of  large  areas  for  the  benefit  of  future  land- 
seekers  has  thus  been  forever  prevented.  The 
possessor  of  the  rivers  and  water-holes  has  gained 
control  of  the  country  behind  his  claim.  In  such 
a  contest,  the  largest  and  richest  concerns  have  a 
great  advantage.  There  was  a  time  when  the 
Government  might  have  laid  out,  for  sale  or  lease, 
large  tracts  of  grazing  lands,  each  with  a  sufficient 
water-front.     It  is  now  too  late. 

The  fundamental  criticism  upon  our  public-land 
policy  is,  not  that  we  have  sold  our  lands  cheap, 
not  that  we  have  freely  given  them  away,  but  that 
the  gifts  have  in  too  many  cases  inured  to  the  bene- 
fit of  those  whom  the  Government  meant  to  ignore. 
The  "  land-grabber  "  is,  in  most  cases,  simply  tak- 
ing advantage  of  the  chances  which  a  defective 
system  has  cast  in  the  way  of  shrewd  and  fore- 
handed or  unscrupulous  men.  The  difficulty  is 
certainly  not  in  the  Land  Office,  which,  in  the  midst 
of  perplexing  complications,  has  striven  hard  to  pro- 
tect our  lands.  The  fault  lies  at  the  door  of  the 
Congress  of  the  United  States,  which  has  the  power, 


254  Essays  on  Government. 

but  not  the  will,  to  correct  notorious  defects  in  our 
system.  Still  farther  back,  the  fault  is  with  the 
free  citizens  of  the  Republic,  who  have  been  too 
much  occupied  to  insist  that  there  should  be  a 
comprehensive  land  policy,  providing  for  the  equit- 
able disposition  of  all  classes  of  the  public  lands.* 


*  The  first  three  columns  of  Table  I.,  on  the  next  page,  are  based  upon  the 
statement  of  the  areas  of  parcels  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States  in  the  Cen- 
sus Atlas  of  1874,  corrected  by  careful  comparison  with  the  revised  areas  which 
appear  in  the  Compendium  of  the  Tenth  Census,  p.  1413.  and  in  Donaldson's 
Public  Domain,  p.  1190.  The  totals  of  the  first  and  second  columns  agree  with 
the  census  estimates.  For  the  third  column,  the  data  for  subtractions  on  account 
of  reservations  and  private  claims  have  been  obtained  from  Donaldson,  6g,  73, 
82-85,  233i  367-382,  405-409.  The  fourth  column  is  found  by  subtracting  for 
each  year  the  total  disposition  (shown  in  acres  in  Table  II.)  from  the  total  area 
acquired  (shown  in  Table  I.,  column  3). 

As  no  official  statement  of  the  disposition  of  the  public  lands  year  by  year  has 
been  found.  Table  II.  has  been  compiled  from  information  in  the  ReJ>orts  of  the 
Land  Office  and  in  Donaldson's  Public  Domain. 

The  column  of  sales  is  derived  solely  from  the  reports  in  American  State 
Pajyers,  Public  Lands,  i.,  82,  ii.,  442,  iii.,  420,  459  (1787-1819)  ;  State  Pa/>ers, 
1820-21,  vol.  i..  Doc.  8,  p.  16  ;  Senate  Documents,  1823-24,  vol.  iii..  Doc.  59, 
p.  9,  and  1833-34,  vol.  i.,  Doc.  9,  pp.  60-63,  82  (1820-1833)  ;  House  Executive 
Documents  for  the  years  1834-1845,  1847-49,  '851-58,  1862-1883 ;  Senate  Ex- 
ecutive Documents  for  the  years  1846,  1850,  1859-1861  (1833-1883).  The  total 
to  1883  (192,584,116)  is  about  14,000,000  less  than  the  total  found  by  adding  the 
items  of  sales  in  Donaldson's  Public  Domain,  519.  There  is  a  discrepancy, 
therefore,  between  the  yearly  official  reports  and  the  semi-ofiicial  statement  of 
1883.  The  table  tallies  with  the  last  total  found  stated  by  the  Land  Office  in 
1833. 

The  three  columns  of  grants,  to  individuals,  to  States,  and  for  internal  im- 
provements, are  based  upon  the  principle  that,  so  soon  as  Congress  passed  an 
act  under  which  a  claim  upon  the  Government  accrued,  the  land  was  disposed 
of.  In  many  cases,  particularly  those  of  the  swamp  lands,  railroad  grants,  home- 
stead, and  tree  claims,  there  will  be  extensive  reversions.  The  second  column, 
of  grants  to  individuals,  is  compiled  from  statements  in  Donaldson,  with  the  addi- 
tion of  a  few  gifts  shown  by  the  Statutes  at  Large.  The  total  is  eight  millions 
more  than  Donaldson's,  but  a  number  of  grants  are  included  which  are  not  footed 
into  his  results.  The  third  column  is  also  derived  from  Donaldson,  and  agrees 
with  his  total  within  two  millions.  The  fourth  column  overruns  his  total  by  a 
hundred  millions.  All  railroad  grants  are  included,  though  patents  have  not  been 
issued. 

To  Mr.  G.  .S.  Callender,  of  the  Harvard  Graduate  School,  the  author  is  indebted 
for  the  continuation  of  the  tables  to  1892,  and  for  a  summary  of  the  reversions. 
He  has  used  the  Annual  Reports  of  the  Commissioner  of  Public  Lands.  The 
items  on  the  line  marked  "  Reversions"  are  for  the  land  restored  to  the  Public 
Domain  from  1885  to  i88g.  Under  the  first  two  headings  there  were  restored 
30,489,314  acres.  It  was  impossible  to  tell  from  the  Reports  just  what  part  of 
this  sum  belonged  under  each  head.    The  division  made  is  an  estimate. 


Table    I. — Showing  Approximately   the   Acquisition   of 
THE  Public  Lands  of  the  United  States,  i 783-1891. 

[Areas  in  Square  Miles.] 


Areas  acquired 
by  the  United 
States. 

Total  area  un- 
der exclusive 
jurisdiction 
of  the  U.  S. 

Areas   of  land 
acquired    by 
the  U.  S. 

Total    area    of 
land   under 
ownership  of 
the  U.  S. 

819,815 

175,210 
229,526 
262,824 
267,789 
267,473 

168,250                168,250 

54,316    i             222,566 

33,142                255,708 

4,965                259.015 

258,292 

1783 
1784 

1785 
1786 
1787 
1788 

819,815 

267,473 

260,673    i          258,292 

1789       Totals. 

309.423 
267,473 
301,573 

34,022 

258,292 
254,921 
288,927 

1790 
1796 
1798 

819,815 

301,573 

294,695              287,303 

1800       Totals. 

877,268 

225,948 
9.790 

54,240 

301,669 
361,716 
1,198,224 
1,198,224 
1,162,596 
1,126,686 
1,080,346 
1,024,346 
1,027,046 

45.532 

•     863,268 

225,948 

9,290 

52.276 

287,858 
333.108 
1,194,827 
1,419,249 
1,416,080 
1,409,352 

1,404,973 
1,399,438 
1,442,603 

1,438,385 

1801 
1802 
1803 
1805 
1812 
1816 
18.7 
1818 
1819 

1,986,061 

1,027,046 

1,491,009 

1820       Totals. 

961,479 
905.266 
847,851 

1,437,476 
1,338,094 
1,330,436 

1821 
1836 
1837 

1,986,061 

847,851 

1,491,009    !        1,313,790 

1840       Totals. 

262,290 

58,880 

614,439 

47.330 

793,632 
1,028,949 
1,572,938 
1,426,985 

1,474.315 
i,^!95,tio 

1.300,557 

58,630 
579.919 

47.330 

1,284,356 
1.337.807 
1,890,013 

1,750,869 

1,754,614 
1,601,906 

1.590,369 

1845 
1846 
1848 
1850 

1853 
1858 

1859 

2,970,000 

1,305,557 

2,176,888 

1,578,822 

i860      Totals. 

531.409 

1,218,939 
1,109,234 

1,564,606 
1,461,247 

531.400 

1,556,654 
1,403,063 
1,862,992 
1.739,271 

1861 
1864 
1867 
1876 

3,501,509 

1,461,247 

2,708,288 

1,705,938 

1880       Totals. 

i,iot,357 
919,492 

1,466,786 
1,442,265 

18S9 
1890 

3,501,509 

919,492 

2,708,288           1,429,527 

1891       Totals. 

(255) 


Table  II.— Showing  ApruoxiMATELY  the  Disposition  of 

[Areas  in  Acres.] 


Sales. 

Grants  to  indi- 
viduals (other 
than  for  inter- 

Grants to  States 
(other  than  for 

jrants   for    in- 
ternal    im- 
prove ments 

Total 

nal     improve- 
ments). 

internal       im- 
provements). 

(to  States  and 
corporations). 

disposition. 

1,037,259 

23,040 

1,060,299 

1787 

450,727 

12,000 

462,727 

1788 

1,487,986 

35,040 

1,523,026 

Total  to  1 790 

100 

100 

1792 

24,000 

24,000 

1795        1 

48,566 

2,095,220 

2,143.786 

1796 

38,365 

300 

38,665 

1800 

1,574,917 

2,154,660 

3,729,577 

Total  to  1800 

360,281 

101,700 

461,981 

1801 

340,010 

24,216 

364.226 

1802 

181,068 

36,800 

773,608 

091,476 

1803 

373,612 

373,612 

1804 

619,266 

619,266 

1805 

473.212 

473.212 

1806 

3S9'Oi2 

13,120 

372,132 

1807 

213.472 

213,472 

1808 

231.045 

231,045 

1809 

235,878 

235,878 

1810 

288,930 

288,930 

1811 

436,932 

4,853,600 

832,164 

6,122,696 

1812 

145,062 

145,062 

1813 

828,411 

828,411 

1814 

1,075,183 

1.075, '83 

1815 

1.473,679 

77,232 

726,437 

2.277,348 

1816 

1,929,142 

873,664 

2.802,806 

1817 

2,388,864 

1, 153. '75 

3,542,039 

1818 

5,110,628 

23,040 

1,017,974 

6,151,642 

1819 

784,608 

1,291,299 

2,075,907 

i82o(isthal0 
Total  to 

19,423,212 

7,260,152 

6,692,537 

33,375,901 

1820-21 

3031404 

303,404 

i82o(2dhal0 

781,213 

781,213 

1821 

801,226 

801,226 

1822 

653,320 

23,000 

653,320 

1823 

1  -2,469,517! 

1  -2,469.517! 

1821-23 

749,323 

772,323 

1824 

893,462 

893,462 

1825 

848,082 

22,508 

870,590 

1826 

926,728 

791,696 

1,718,424 

1827 

965,600 

833,826 

1,799,426 

1828 

1,244,860 

1,244,860 

1829 

1,929,734 

1,422,093 

29.552 

3,381,379 

1830 
1831 

2,777,857 

2,777,857 

2,462,342 

301,280 

2,763,622 

1832 

3,856,278 

200,000 

4.056,278 

1833 

4,658,219 

36,000 

4,694,219 

1834 

15,934,430 

500,000 

16,434,430 

1835 

20,074,871 

2,138,117 

22,212,988 

1836 

5,601,103 

5,601,103 

1837 

3,414,907 

125,431 

3,540,338 

1838 

4.976,383 

4,976,383 

1839 

2,236,890 

2,236,890 

1840 

93,043,927 

9,765,033 

8,830,654 

1,780,505 

113,420,119 

Totals  101841 

(256) 


THE  Public  Lands  of  the  United  States,  1783-1891. 


Grants  to  indi-' 

Grants    for    in- 

viduals (other 

Grants  to  States 

ter  n  a  1     i  m- 

Sales. 

than  for  inter- 

(other than  for 

p  r  0  V  e  m  ents 

Total 

nal     improve- 

internal      im- 

(to States  and 

disposition. 

ments). 

provements). 

corporations). 

1,164,796 

7,906,554 

259,368 

9,330,718 

1841 

1,129,218 

210,720 

24,219 

1,364.157 

1842 

1,605,264 

640 

1,605,904 

1843 

1,754,763 

144,131 

1,898,894 

1844 

1,843-527 

1,997.967 

796,630 

4,638,124 

1845 

2,263,731 

1,050,709 

3,314,440 

1846 

2,521,306 

13,210,360 

15,731,666 

1847 

1,887,553 

113,348 

2,000,901 

1848 

1,329,903 

1,280 

13,831,443 

15,162,626 

1S49 

1,405,839 

15,733.285 

59,998,217 

3,751,711 

80,889,052 

1850 

1,846,847 

1,846,847 

1851 

1,553,071 

1,735,976 

2,514,7x1 

5,803,758 

1S52 

1,083,495 

290,534 

9.254.079 

2,682,171 

13.310,279 

1853 

7,035,735 

373,929 

92,160 

7,501,824 

1854 

15.729.525 

33-993,790 

550.893 

50,274,208 

1855 

9,227,879 

14,559,729 

23,787,608 

1856 

4,142,744 

3,098,710 

5,^18,450 

12,359,904 

1857 

3,804,908 

6,667 

3,811.575 

1858 

3,961,581 

3,421,866 

7,383,447 

1859 

3,461,204 

3,929,279 

7,390,483 

i860 

Total <^  trt 

61,796,816 

75,466,345 

113,962,531 

31,600,842 

382,826,534 

I86I 

1,465,604 

13,361,902 

14,827,506 

1861 

144,850 

9,600,000 

23,504,001 

33,248,851 

1862 

91,354 

1,075.775 

3,068,231 

4,439.143 

8,674,503 

1863 

432,734 

1,247,170 

6,844.551 

47,209,927 

55,734.382 

1864 

5';7,2i2 

1,141,443 

4,031,328 

1,328,000 

6,057,983 

1865 

388,294 

1,890,847 

34,686,075 

36,965,000 

1866 

756,620 

1,834,512 

126,910 

2,718,042 

1867 

914,941 

2,332,151 

3,480,281 

6,727,373 

1868 

2,899.544 

2,698,481 

104,080 

5.702,105 

1S69 

2,159.515 

3,754,203 

1,000,000 

6,913,718 

1870 

1,389,982 

4,657.355 

76,735 

18,903,218 

25,027,290 

IS7I 

1.370,320 

4.595,435 

327.903 

6,293,658 

1872 

1,626,266 

3,810,536 

5,436,802 

1873 

1,041,345 

4,340,795 

5,382,140 

1874 

745,061 

2,843,476 

3.761,635 

7.350,172 

187s 

640,691 

3,467,730 

4,108,421 

1876 

754,789 

2,700,808 

3-455.597 

1S77 

1,188,108 

6,399.892 

7,588,000 

IS78 

622,573 

8,042,886 

8.665.459 

1879 

850,740 

8,224,192 

^ 

9,074,932 

1880 
Totals  to 

81,837,359 

140,524,032 

158,187,194 

162,230,099 

642,778,684 

1881 

1.587,617 

6,791,899 

230,400 

8,609,916 

1881 

3,611,530 

8,894,731 

12,506,261 

1S82 

5,547,610 

11,272,844 

16,820,454 

1883 

6,317.847 

11,915,972 

18,233,819 

1884 

3,912,450 

12,170,890 

16,083,340 

1885 

3,773,498 

14.536,444 

18,309,942 

18S6 

5,587,910 

11.818,747 

17,406,657 

1887 

5,790,652 

10,411,920 

16,202,572 

1888 

3,867,433 

8,580,299 

15,382,768 

27,830,500 

1889 

3,302,846 

7,2IQ,oSl 

7,540,760 

15,693,760 

1S90 

2,143,090 

6,009,399 

8,152,489 

1891 

—  10,000,000 

-  20,489,314 

-  52,669,674 
109,560,425 

-  83,158,988 

Reversions 

217,279,842 

229,656,944 

181,341,122 

735,469,406 

Tot'ls  to  1892 

17 


(257) 


XL 

WHY    THE    SOUTH    WAS    DEFEATED 
IN  THE  CIVIL  WAR. 


The  question  which  we  shall  try  to  answer  in 
this  essay  is  apparently  very  simple.  Ask  an 
officer  of  the  Union  army,  and  he  will  tell  you  that 
the  North  won  because  of  our  great  generals — that 
Thomas,  Sheridan,  Sherman,  and  Grant  broke  the 
Confederacy  to  pieces.  Ask  a  soldier  how  the  vic- 
tory was  won,  and  he  will  tell  you  that  "  the  Sixth 
Corps  smashed  Ewell  at  Sailor's  Creek,"  or  that 
"  Sherman's  veterans  cut  the  Confederacy  in  two," 
Ask  a  public  man,  and  he  will  tell  you,  perhaps 
in  ten  volumes,  that  it  was  Abraham  Lincoln  to 
whom  we  owe  the  success  of  the  Union.  Ask 
Abraham  Lincoln  himself,  and  he  would  reply  in 
the  spirit  of  those  words  which  no  repetition  can 
make  trite,  and  which  prove  him  a  master  of 
English  as  he  was  a  master  of  men,  that  the  war 
was  carried  on  by  "  a  government  of  the  people, 
by  the  people,  and  for  the  people."     Each  of  these 

(258) 


Zbe  mortb  aiiD  the  Soutb.  259 

answers  is  true  so  far  as  it  goes.  The  Confederacy 
never  could  have  been  put  down  without  com- 
manders of  genius,  guiding  magnificent  armies, 
supported  by  those  statesmen  of  whom  Abraham 
Lincoln  was  the  chief,  backed  up  by  the  devotion 
and  self-sacrifice  of  a  great  nation.  Military  men 
have  a  saying  that  there  comes  a  time  in  a  cam- 
paign when,  if  victory  is  to  be  obtained,  it  is  neces- 
sary to  put  into  service  the  last  officer,  the  last 
man,  the  last  camp  follower,  and  the  last  army 
mule  ;  and  the  triumphant  and  complete  success 
of  the  northern  arms  in  the  Civil  War  is  due  to 
the  fact  that  when  the  final  test  of  strength  came 
in  1864-65,  the  North  had  at  every  point  more 
officers,  more  men,  more  camp  followers,  and  more 
army  mules. 

Yet  even  an  observer  who  could  have  foreseen 
the  eventual  combination  of  military,  material,  and 
moral  forces  of  the  Northern  people,  might  still 
have  predicted  in  1861  that  the  Southern  Confed- 
eracy would  obtain  its  independence.  A  Southern 
address  of  April  30,  1861,  declared  that  "  a  trium- 
phant victory  and  independence  with  an  unpar- 
alleled career  of  glory,  prosperity,  and  progress 
await  us  in  the  future,"  At  the  beginning  of  the 
struggle  the  Southern  leaders,  even  those  who  best 
understood  the  fighting  spirit  of  the  North,  were 
as  confident  of  success  as  they  were  of  the  rising  of 
the  sun.  Thus  Jefferson  Davis,  in  his  message  of 
July  20,  1S61,  declared  that  "  to  speak  of  subjugat- 


26o  Bssags  on  Government. 

ing  such  a  people,  so  united  and  determined,  is  to 
speak  in  a  language  incomprehensible  to  them." 
Toward  the  close  of  1862,  Mr.  Gladstone  made  his 
famous  declaration — which  he  has  lived  to  repent: 
"  There  is  no  doubt  that  Jefferson  Davis  and  other 
leaders  of  the  South  have  made  an  army ;  that 
they  are  making,  it  appears,  a  navy  ;  and  that  they 
have  made  what  is  more  than  either  ;  they  have 
made  a  nation."  At  the  very  beginning  of  the 
struggle,  old  General  Wool  gave  it  as  his  military 
opinion  that  two  hundred  thousand  troops  should 
be  placed  in  the  field  against  Richmond ;  and 
Sherman  asked  for  a  like  number  in  Kentucky,  if 
the  movement  were  to  be  put  down  at  the  outset. 
No  Southerner  and  few  foreigners  believed  that  the 
North  possessed  a  military  superiority  over  the 
South.  To  be  sure,  John  Bright,  who  might  with 
William  Lloyd  Garrison  have  said,  "The  world  is 
my  country,"  not  only  asserted  the  rightfulness  of 
the  principles  of  the  North,  but  predicted  its  suc- 
cess ;  and  Cairnes,  in  his  book  upon  the  Slave- 
power,  showed  reason  why  we  must  succeed ;  but 
most  other  observers  saw  only  that  Virginia  was 
older  than  Plymouth,  that  the  South  had  had  as 
long  and  as  eventful  a  history  as  the  North,  that  in 
the  Revolution  and  after  it  Southern  statesmen  had 
stood  on  more  than  equal  terms  with  Northern, 
and  that  for  seventy  years  the  influence  of  the 
South  had  been  predominant  in  internal  parties 
and  in  foreign  policy.     What  reason  was  there  to 


^bc  IRortb  anO  tbc  Soutb.  261 

suppose  that  when  the  two  sections  were  separated, 
the  South  would  prove  inferior?  It  was  known 
that  the  population  of  the  South  was  smaller,  but 
the  experience  of  the  world  up  to  that  time  seemed 
to  show  that  a  people  determined  to  resist  could 
not  be  permanently  conquered  by  four  times  their 
force,  unless  a  policy  of  extermination  were 
adopted.  Holland,  with  its  two  millions,  had  sus- 
tained itself  during  a  war  of  seventy  years  against 
the  greatest  and  proudest  empire  of  the  world  ; 
Spain,  from  1809  to  18 12,  had  by  a  popular  upris- 
ing successfully  resisted  the  armies  of  Napoleon ; 
Ireland,  after  a  domination  of  seven  centuries,  is 
not  yet  perfectly  subdued  ;  the  American  colonies, 
with  a  population  of  three  millions,  had  success- 
fully resisted  the  mother  country  with  a  population 
of  twelve  millions ;  the  feeble  Spanish  American 
colonies,  with  the  exception  of  Cuba,  had  all  won 
their  independence  against  the  force  of  Spain. 
The  secession  of  the  Southern  States  and  their  ac- 
ceptance of  the  issue  of  the  war  was,  therefore,  not 
a  foolhardy  enterprise :  the  experience  of  mankind 
made  it  probable  that  it  would  succeed.  Nor  did 
the  Confederacy  expect  to  depend  wholly  upon  its 
own  resources.     One  of  the  first  acts  of  the  Con- 

• 

federate  Government  was  to  send  envoys  to  foreign 
powers.  The  South  believed  that  its  cotton  was 
so  essential  to  England  and  to  France  that  they 
must  interfere,  if  necessary,  to  assist  the  infant 
nation;  and  great  was  the  jubilation  when,  on  the 


262  3E06ag0  on  ©overument. 

3d  of  December,  1863,  Pope  Pius  IX.  addressed  a 
letter  to  that  "  illustris  ct  Jionorabilis  vir,'^  Jeffer- 
son Davis,  which  was  construed  by  the  Confeder- 
acy into  a  recognition  by  a  foreign  potentate— the 
only  recognition  which  it  ever  received. 

The  first  years  of  the  war  were  not  such  as  to 
destroy  the  hopes  of  the  South.  The  first  battle 
of  Bull  Run,  in  1861  ;  the  second  battle  of  Bull 
Run,  and  Pittsburg  Landing,  in  1862;  Chicka- 
mauga,  Chancellorsville,  and  even  Gettysburg,  in 
1863,  proved  that  the  South  might  still  hope  to 
maintain  itself  in  the  field,  until  dissensions  in  the 
North,  or  foreign  complications,  or  the  interven- 
tion of  foreign  powers,  should  put  an  end  to  the 
war.  To  the  last,  the  Northern  armies  were  fully 
employed.  In  the  great  campaign  of  1864,  Grant 
lost  more  than  the  entire  army  of  Lee  ;  and  at  the 
end  of  it  Lee's  army  was  intact.  The  military  col- 
lapse of  the  Confederacy  was  not  the  result  of 
happy  accident,  nor  of  overpowering  generalship ; 
it  was  caused  by  the  steady  unremitting  pressure 
of  an  adversary  superior  in  forces,  in  resources,  and 
in  morale.  After  the  war  was  over,  Lee  was  once 
asked  by  a  Confederate  officer  why,  during  the 
campaign  of  1864,  he  never  made  a  diversion  or  a 
sudden  attack  upon  Grant's  lines  ;  and  Lee  replied 
that  Grant  had  but  once  throughout  the  campaign 
given  him  an  opportunity,  and  that  that  oppor- 
tunity had  been  lost  by  the  error  of  a  subordinate. 
Nowhere  in  history  is  there  an   example  of  more 


XLbc  IHoitb  auD  tbe  Soutb.  263 

undiscouraged  attack  or  more  stubborn  resistance, 
than  in  the  Civil  War, 

Some  deeper  causes  must,  therefore,  be  sought 
if  we  will  account  for  the  fact  that  not  only  was 
the  South  beaten,  but  that  the  defeat  was  over- 
whelming, absolute,  and  permanent.  There  must 
have  been  essential  differences  in  the  character  and 
the  equipment  of  the  two  sides ;  and  it  is  the  pur- 
pose of  this  essay  to  discuss  those  differences,  and 
to  show  what  constituted  the  weakness  of  the 
South  and  the  strength  of  the  North.  We  shall 
not  concern  ourselves  with  the  causes  of  seces- 
sion, with  the  question  whether  it  was  constitu- 
tional or  unconstitutional,  right  or  wrong.  We 
shall  simply  take  the  two  sections  as  they  existed 
on  April  12,  1861,  when  the  war  began  with  the 
firing  upon  Fort  Sumter,  and  as  they  were  devel- 
oped down  to  the  surrender  of  the  Southern  army 
in  1865.  Some  of  the  reasons  for  the  success  of 
the  North  are  to  be  found  in  the  geographical  situ- 
ation of  the  two  parts  of  the  country,  some  in  the 
economic  differences  of  the  two  sections,  some  in 
the  social  differences  in  their  civilization,  and  some 
in  the  different  moral  quality  of  the  people,  and  the 
institutions  for  which  they  were  fighting. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  struggle,  the  advantage 
of  geographical  situation  seemed  to  be  decidedly 
with  the  South.  Leaving  out  of  account  the  Ter- 
ritories and  the  two  States  of  the  Pacific  Slope, 
which  entered  very  little  into  the  military  contest, 


264  iSssass  on  (Bovcrnincnt. 


the  remaining  seventeen  free  States  had,  in   i860, 
768,255  square  miles,  while  the  fifteen  slave-hold- 
ing States  had  an   area  of  875,743  square  miles. 
This  larger  territory,  however,  was  not  in  itself  a 
source  of  military  strength.     Its  frontiers  were  vast 
and  difificult  to  defend,  and  a  very  considerable  part 
of  that  territory  never  came  under  the  control  of 
the  Confederate  States  of  America.     In   the  re- 
sources of  the  soil,  in  variety  of  natural  production, 
the  South  was  in  every  way  equal  to  the  North. 
The  great  staple  of  the  South  had  for  many  years 
been  cotton.     It  was  easily  raised,  easily  handled, 
had  considerable   value   in  small   bulk,  and   com- 
manded a  good  price  in  cash  in  the  markets  of  the 
world.     The  cotton  crop  of   1S60  was   4,700,000 
bales,  valued  at  $230,000,000.     With  cotton  and 
the  proceeds  of  cotton,  the  South  was  able  to  buy 
clothing,  supplies,  and   food;  for  it   is  a  notable 
fact  that  for  many  years  the   South  had  been  ac- 
customed to  supply  itself  in  part  with  bacon  and 
corn  from  the  Northwestern  States.     One  of  the 
early  acts  of  the  Confederacy  was  to  prohibit  the 
exportation  of    cotton,  except    from   Confederate 
seaports  ;  it  was  hoped  thereby  to  bring  foreign 
powers  to  interfere.     The  result  was  that  a  consid- 
erable part  of  the  cotton  crop  of  i860  and  almost 
the  whole  of  the  crops  of  1861-2-3-4  were  shut 
in  by  the  blockade.     A  great  pressure  was  brought 
to  bear  by  the  Confederate  Government  upon  the 
planters,  to   induce  them  to  sow  corn,   and    this 


XLbc  novtb  aiiD  tbe  Soutb.  265 

pressure  had  especial  effect  in  the  year  1864.  The 
industry  of  the  people,  particularly  in  Georgia, 
prepared  a  bountiful  crop,  which  ripened  just  in 
time  to  furnish  subsistence  for  Sherman's  army  on 
its  march  to  the  sea.  Toward  the  end  of  the  war 
the  people  of  Richmond  sometimes  suffered  for 
food.  George  Gary  Eggleston,  in  his  "  Rebel's 
Recollections,"  tells  pathetic  stories  of  the  wretch- 
edness to  which  the  troops  were  reduced  in  1865  ; 
and  it  is  well  known  that  at  the  surrender  of  Ap- 
pomattox, General  Lee  was  obliged  to  ask  for 
rations  for  his  troops  from  the  commander  of  the 
conquering  forces.  The  Northern  staples  through- 
out the  war,  especially  bread-stuffs,  were  freely 
exported,  and  were  turned  into  goods  and  muni- 
tions of  war. 

Inferior  as  the  South  was  in  its  products,  it  was 
strong  in  natural  defences.  The  Atlantic  and 
Gulf  coasts  abounded  in  shallow  harbors  not  easily 
penetrable  by  a  hostile  force.  It  was  a  coast  diffi- 
cult to  invade,  yet  furnishing  many  havens  from 
which  cruisers  and  privateers  might  sally  forth. 
Throughout  the  war  no  progress  was  made  by 
Northern  armies  moving  inward  from  the  sea-board, 
except  on  the  Mississippi. 

From  the  valley  of  the  Shenandoah  to  northern 
Alabama  the  South  was  flanked  by  a  natural  and 
impregnable  defence,  the  Appalachian  chain  of 
mountains.  In  the  conditions  of  military  transpor- 
tation at  that  time  it  was  impossible  for  a  large 


266  Bssags  on  (Bovevnment. 

army  to  carry  with  it  the  supplies  for  men  and 
animals  necessary  for  a  march  of  a  hundred  miles 
through  a  mountain  region.  At  the  beginning  of 
the  war  Lincoln,  with  the  supreme  common-sense 
which,  when  applied  to  military  matters,  made  him 
often  a  better  general  than  the  generals,  suggested 
that  a  railroad  should  be  built  southeast  from  some 
point  on  the  Ohio  River,  to  penetrate  the  moun- 
tain system.  The  next  few  years  showed  that  had 
that  counsel  been  followed  it  might  have  shortened 
the  war,  by  a  year  ;  for  the  only  country  between 
Harper's  Ferry  and  northern  Mississippi  which  at 
that  time  was  penetrated  by  a  railroad  leading 
from  north  to  south  was  the  rugged  region  lying 
between  Chattanooga  and  Atlanta.  Down  that 
line  of  railroad  Sherman  fought  his  way  in  1864; 
and  from  Atlanta  he  proceeded  on  the  march 
which  cut  the  Confederacy  in  twain.  Except  upon 
that  line  of  railroad  the  South  proved  impregnable 
to  land  assault  from  the  northwest. 

Another  vast  geographical  advantage  which  the 
South  possessed  at  the  beginning  of  the  war  dis- 
appeared in  1863.  By  its  control  of  the  mouth  of 
the  Mississippi,  the  Southern  Confederacy  ex- 
pected to  compel  the  friendship,  if  not  the  adhe- 
sion, of  the  upper  Mississippi  States.  The  South 
believed  that  it  held  in  its  hand  the  key  to  the 
commerce  of  the  interior  of  the  Union,  and  an 
early  act  of  the  Confederate  Congress  declared  the 
Mississippi  open  to  the  friends  of  the  Confeder- 


^be  mortb  anD  tbe  Soutb.  267 

acy.  But  the  Erie  Canal  and  the  four  lines  of 
trans- Alleghany  railways,  the  New  York  Central, 
Erie,  Pennsylvania  Central,  and  Baltimore  &  Ohio, 
united  the  West  still  more  strongly  to  the  East. 
The  Northwestern  States  saw,  aside  from  all  moral 
questions  connected  with  slavery,  that  the  success 
of  the  Union  meant  that  both  the  eastern  and  the 
southern  highways  would  be  opened,  while  the 
success  of  the  Confederacy  meant  that  one  or  the 
other  must  be  in  the  hands  of  a  hostile  power. 
Whatever  the  expectations  of  the  South,  the  capt- 
ure of  New  Orleans  in  1862,  and  of  Vicksburg, 
July  4,  1863,  not  only  dismembered  the  Confed- 
eracy, but  quieted  the  fears  of  the  northern  interior 
States.  Thenceforward,  as  Lincoln  wrote,  "the 
Father  of  Waters  rolled  unvexed  to  the  sea." 

Another  military  advantage  for  the  South  was 
the  sparseness  of  its  population,  and  the  fact  that 
a  great  part  of  the  theatre  of  war  was  untilled. 
Except  in  the  Shenandoah  Valley,  to  a  less  degree 
in  Mississippi,  the  Federal  armies  could  nowhere 
support  themselves  from  the  country  until  Sher- 
man's march  to  the  sea  in  1864.  They  advanced 
through  regions  heavily  wooded,  and  they  advanced 
into  an  enemy's  country.  The  South  had  not 
only  the  advantages  of  situation,  but  of  fighting  in 
the  midst  of  a  friendly  population  and  fighting  on 
the  inside  lines.  However  unpractical  the  trans- 
portation system  of  the  South,  it  was  much  easier 
to  move  troops  from    Richmond  to  Atlanta  than 


268  j£s6ag8  on  ©oventmcnt. 

from  Washington  to  the  Mississippi.  In  a  word, 
the  theatre  of  the  war  was  finally  narrowed  to  the 
strip  of  territory  between  the  western  edge  of  the 
mountains  and  the  sea.  Within  that  strip  a 
smaller  number  of  troops  could  make  head  against 
a  larger  number;  and  in  the  later  stages  of  the  war 
two  hundred  thousand  Confederate  troops  kept  a 
million  Northern  soldiers  employed. 

All  comparisons  of  area  and  even  of  geographical 
advantages  are  subordinate  to  the  question  of  the 
economic  resources  of  the  two  sections — -in  men,  in 
wealth,  in  courage,  in  military  resources,  and  in 
means  of  communication.  And  here  we  reach 
that  disadvantage  of  the  South  to  which  its  con- 
quest must  be  chiefly  attributed.  We  have,  in  the 
census  of  i860,  the  means  of  exactly  comparing  the 
population  of  the  two  sections  at  the  outbreak  of 
the  war.  The  1$  slaveholding  States  had  a  popu- 
lation of  12,315,373;  the  17  northern  free  States, 
from  Kansas  to  Maine,  had  a  population  of  18,441- 
017;  that  is,  the  population  of  the  slave-holding 
region  to  the  free  region  was  about  as  two  to  three. 

The  proportion  between  the  population  of  the 
free  and  of  the  slaveholding  sections  had  greatly 
changed  since  1790.  In  that  year  the  South  had  a 
population  equal  to  the  combined  population  of 
the  Middle  and  New  England  States.  In  1830, 
the  North  had  gained  a  million  more  than  the 
South;  in  i860,  it  had  gained  six  millions  more. 
The  rapid  growth  of  the  North  had  been  due  in 


G:bc  novtb  an^  the  Soixtb.  26g 

great  part  to  immigration  :  of  the  4,136,175  foreign- 
born  persons  within  the  limits  of  the  United  States 
in  i860,  only  about  three  hundred  thousand  could 
be  found  in  the  slaveholding  States  outside  the 
cities  of  St.  Louis,  Louisville,  Baltimore,  and  New 
Orleans — all  cities  connected  as  much  with  the 
West  as  with  the  South.  In  the  North,  the  pro- 
portion of  foreigners  was  twenty  per  cent. ;  in  the 
Confederacy,  it  was  three  per  cent.  The  changed 
importance  of  the  two  sections  is  shown  in  the 
census  maps  which  illustrate  the  distribution  of 
the  population  by  degrees  of  density  in  1790  and 
in  i860.  It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  almost  all 
the  areas  of  dense  population  are  found  north  of 
the  Ohio  River,  and  of  Maryland  and  Virginia. 
The  loss  of  Southern  predominance  is  shown  by 
the  fact  that,  in  179O,  of  the  seven  first  States  of 
the  Union  in  order  of  population,  four  were  slave 
States;  in  i860,  of  the  seven  first  States,  but  one 
was  a  slave  State,  and  that  was  Missouri,  which, 
in  1790,  had  been  a  wilderness  and  not  within  the 
limits  of  the  United  States.  In  fact,  nothing  can 
be  more  certain  than  that  the  Civil  War  was  pre- 
cipitated by  the  conviction  of  Southern  leaders 
that  the  North  had  such  a  growing  advantage  in 
population  that  each  decade  of  delay  made  the 
South  weaker  in  proportion. 

Yet  the  superiority  of  Northern  numbers  was 
plainly  entirely  insufficient  for  carrying  on  a  war  of 
offence  and  of  conquest.     A  comparison  between 


2/0  jEssage  on  ©orernment. 


the  population  of  the  slaveholding  and  that  of  the 
free  States  does  not  tell  the  whole  story.  The 
Southern  Confederacy,  at  the  very  beginning,  en- 
countered a  fatal  disappointment ;  it  failed  to  carry 
with  it  four  of  the  slaveholding  States,  Missouri, 
Maryland,  Delaware,  Kentucky,  and  a  part  of  a 
fifth,  West  Virginia.  These  five  States,  having  a 
combined  population  of  3,600,000  people,  never  se- 
ceded and  never  furnished  money  by  loan  or  tax- 
ation for  the  Confederate  cause  ;  and  the  men  who 
entered  the  Confederate  army  from  those  States 
were  nearly  offset  by  the  mountaineers  from  Ten- 
nessee and  North  Carolina  who  entered  the  Union 
Army.  The  action  of  a  few  patriotic  men  like 
Holt  of  Kentucky,  Fletcher  of  Missouri,  and 
Brown  of  Maryland,  and  the  prompt  action  of 
Butler  and  Fremont  and  Buell  and  Grant,  in  se- 
curing a  military  occupation  of  those  States,  pre- 
vented them  from  throwing  in  their  lot  with  the 
Confederacy.  The  population  of  the  eleven  seced- 
ing States  was  8,700,000;  the  population  of  the 
twenty-one  non-seceding  States,  from  Kansas  to 
Maine,  was  21,950,000.  Instead  of  the  odds  of 
population  being  three  to  two  in  favor  of  the 
North,  they  were  thus  made  five  to  two.  With 
proper  military  management,  aided  by  a  spirited 
support  from  the  Northern  people,  the  defeat  of 
the  South  was  therefore  physically  possible  ;  in- 
deed, defeat  was  likely.  Nor  was  this  the  only 
advantage  gained  by  the  North  through  its  rela- 


^bc  IRoitb  auD  tbe  Scutb.  271 

tions  with  the  border  States  in  1861.  The  theatre 
of  war  was  thrust  further  south.  The  possession 
of  Kentucky  and  Missouri  enabled  the  northern 
troops  to  block  the  entrance  to  the  Tennessee  and 
to  the  Missouri  Rivers  ;  and  the  military  occupa- 
tion of  the  border  States,  which  were  justly  assumed 
to  be  lukewarm  in  their  support  of  the  Union, 
made  it  possible  to  return  from  those  States  mem- 
bers of  Congress  who  did  not  represent  their  peo- 
ple ;  thus  was  insured  that  compact  majority  in 
Congress  which  supported  the  President,  pressed 
forward  the  war,  urged  through  the  constitutional 
amendments,  and  completed  the  process  of  recon- 
struction. When  Virginia,  in  April,  i86r,  re- 
sponded with  a  defiance  to  the  President's  call  for 
troops,  she  did  it  because  she  understood,  as  Von 
Hoist  has  well  said,  that  she  belonged  either  to 
hammer  or  anvil,  and  she  preferred  to  strike  rather 
than  to  receive  a  blow.  Though  the  secession  of 
Maryland,  Kentucky,  and  Missouri  was  prevented, 
those  States  could  not  remove  the  war  from  their 
borders ;  but  their  strength  was  lost  to  the  weaker 
party,  if  not  wholly  transferred  to  the  stronger. 

If,  then,  the  South  were  to  win,  a  numerical  in- 
feriority must  be  made  up  by  a  superiority  of  re- 
sources ;  but  in  wealth  still  more  than  in  numbers 
the  South  had  lagged  behind.  Tn  the  seceding 
States,  56,000,000  acres  of  land  were  improved,  and 
the  total  value  of  farm  lands  was  ^  1,85 0,000,000. 
In  the  North  and  the  border  States  the  improved 


'2-T2.  Bsaags  on  Goveinmcnt. 

land  was  less  than  twice  as  great  in  area  but  its 
value  was  $4,800,000,000,  or  more  than  two  and  a 
half  times  as  much.  Throughout  the  South  the 
tillage  was  primitive  and  rude  and  most  of  it  was 
carried  on  by  slave  labor  ;  in  the  North,  machinery 
and  improved  processes  made  it  possible  to  raise  a 
larger  crop  in  proportion  to  the  laborers  employed. 
Manufactures  of  every  kind  were  wofully  deficient 
in  the  South.  In  a  region  including  the  enormous 
coal  and  iron  beds  of  Alabama  and  Georgia,  one 
of  the  richest  deposits  on  the  face  of  the  earth, 
there  were  but  one  modern  blast  furnace  and  ten 
rail  mills.  To  manufacture  its  great  staple,  cotton, 
the  South  had  but  150  factories,  against  more  than 
900  in  the  North,  and  the  value  of  the  manufactured 
fabric  of  the  South  was  but  $8,000,000,  in  the 
total  of  $1 15,000,000.  Of  the  1,260  woollen  facto- 
ries of  the  country,  only  78  were  in  the  South. 
The  manufacture  of  clothing,  an  essential  industry 
when  war  is  going  on,  employed,  in  i860,  less  than 
2,000  persons  in  the  Southern  States,  and  nearly 
100,000  in  the  North.  Of  boots  and  shoes,  the 
South  furnished  but  three  per  cent,  of  the  product. 
Well  did  the  Lynchburg  Virginian  say  : 

"  Dependent  upon  Europe  and  the  North  for 
almost  every  yard  of  cloth,  and  every  coat  and 
boot  and  hat  that  we  wear,  for  our  axes,  scythes, 
tubs,  and  buckets,  in  short,  for  everything  except 
our  bread  and  meat,  it  must  occur  to  the  South 
that  if  our  relations  with  the  North  are  ever  sev- 


Zbc  mortb  aiiD  tbc  Soutb.  273 

ered — and  how  soon  they  may  be  none  can  know ; 
may  God  forbid  it  long! — we  should,  in  all  the 
South,  not  be  able  to  clothe  ourselves ;  we  could 
not  fill  our  firesides,  plough  our  fields,  nor  mow 
our  meadows ;  in  fact,  we  should  be  reduced  to  a 
state  more  abject  than  we  are  willing  to  look  at 
even  prospectively.  And  yet,  all  of  these  things 
staring  us  in  the  face,  we  shut  cwjr  eyes  and  go  in 
blindfold." 

The  accumulated  wealth  of  the  two  sections  is 
hard  to  estimate.  The  real  estate  of  the  South 
was,  in  i860,  valued  at  under  $2,000,000,000 ;  that 
of  the  North  at  over  $5,000,000,000.  The  personal 
estate  of  each  was  returned  at  about  $2,500,000,000  ; 
but  in  the  South  that  personalty  consisted  in  great 
part  of  slaves,  a  form  of  riches  which  proved  to 
have  a  singular  aptitude  for  taking  to  itself  wings 
and  flying  away.  Perhaps  a  better  comparison  of 
wealth  is  that  of  imports  ;  in  i860  the  South  im- 
ported $31,000,000  worth  of  goods,  and  the  North 
$331,000,000  worth. 

In  modern  warfare,  however,  credit  is  often  as 
valuable  as  property.  Here  again  the  South  was 
from  the  first  in  a  position  of  inferiority.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  war  the  South  had  a  banking 
capital  of  $47,000,000 ;  the  North,  of  about  $330,- 
000,000.  The  accumulations  of  specie  and  of 
stocks  of  goods  in  the  South  were  probably  not 
one-seventh  of  those  in  the  North.  The  very  first 
attempts  to  raise  money  on  any  considerable  scale 
showed  the  weakness  of  the  South.  The  taxes 
18 


2/4  Bssass  on  Government. 

were  rigorous  and  steadily  increased,  but  the  money 
with  which  to  pay  them  did  not  exist ;  and  pro- 
vision for  payment  in  kind  was  made  at  the  very 
beginning.     Cotton  and   food  products  were   the 
usual  legal-tender ;  but  at  one  time  the  women  of 
the  South  were  called  upon  to  subscribe  their  hair 
to  be  sold  for  the  support  of  the  government,  and 
they  responded  in  that  spirit  of  heroic  self-devotion 
which  marked  the  Southern    women   throughout 
the  struggle.     It  is  impossible  to  give  the  figures 
of  the  revenue  or  expenditure  of  the  Confederate 
Government  after  the  first  year  of  the  war.     It  is 
probable  that  in  no  year  did  the  government  re- 
ceive in  taxes  and  loans  the  equivalent  of  $ioo,- 
000,000  in  greenback  currency ;  while  the  North 
in  the  year  1865  raised  in  taxes,  $322,000,000,  and 
borrowed     $1,472,000,000,    a    considerable     part 
abroad.     Of    the  debt  of   the    Confederacy  it  is 
equally  impossible  to  speak  with  accuracy.     On 
one   occasion    the    Secretary  of   the   Confederate 
Treasury  sent  in  to  Congress  a  report  in  which  he 
stated  the  outstanding  debt.     The  next  day  the 
report   was  withdrawn  because  a  trifling  error  in 
the  total    had   been    discovered.     The   error   was 
$400,000,000;  what  the  total  must  have  been  may 
be  left  to  the  imagination.     It  is  enough  to  say 
that  the  resources  of  the  country  were  drained  for 
the  support  of  the  government,  that  paper  money 
was  floated  until  it  would  float  no  longer,  until  it 
was  signed  in  basketsfull  by  young  ladies  of  good 


XLbc  moitb  anC»  tbc  Soutb.  275 

family  in  Richmond,  until  post-office  clerks  re- 
signed because  they  could  no  longer  live  on  nine 
thousand  dollars  a  year.  The  popular  state  of 
mind  in  regard  to  Southern  finances  is  well  stated 
in  a  story  related  by  a  Confederate  officer.  A  raw- 
boned  countryman  was  seen  riding  through  the 
camp  upon  a  fine  horse.  An  officer  stopped  him 
and  offered  him  five  hundred  dollars  for  the  horse. 
"  What,"  said  the  man,  "five  hundred  dollars  for 
that  horse  ?  Five  hundred  dollars  !  Why,  I  paid 
a  thousand  dollars  this  morning  for  currying  of 
him."  Mr.  Eggleston  relates  that  the  highest 
price  he  ever  saw  paid  was  five  hundred  dollars  for 
a  pair  of  boots.  After  Lee's  surrender,  when  no 
amount  of  Confederate  currency  was  of  any  value, 
and  greenbacks  were  hard  to  obtain,  a  Virginia 
gentleman  travelled  a  long  distance  with  no  other 
funds  than  a  keg  of  molasses  :  for  entertainment  or 
ferriage,  he  simply  opened  the  spigot  and  let  a 
sufficient  quantity  flow  to  pay  his  bill. 

The  poverty  of  the  South,  a  poverty  made  more 
unendurable  by  the  rigorous  blockade,  bore  es- 
pecially hard  in  the  matter  of  military  supplies. 
The  one  large  iron  works  in  the  Confederacy,  the 
Tredegar,  at  Richmond,  was  run  night  and  day  to 
supply  materials.  Arms,  cannon,  munitions  could 
be  imported  in  limited  quantities  by  the  blockade 
runners;  clothing  came  in  the  same  way;  but 
medical  supplies,  hospital  comforts,  even  food, 
were  often  lacking.     According  to  a  Confederate 


'Z']^  BssagB  en  ©ovcnimcnt. 

officer,  great  was  the  joy  expressed  in  the  army 
when,  by  a  convenient  obliquity  of  vision  on  the 
part  of  General  Butler,  who  commanded  the  Union 
lines  at  that  point,  a  cargo  of  Bermuda  onions  was 
brought  through  the  Union  lines  and  issued  to 
Lee's  army. 

The  North,  on  the  other  hand,  was  supplied 
with  all  that  a  rich  country  could  furnish,  or  that 
money  could  buy  in  foreign  countries.  No  army 
in  the  history  of  the  world  was  ever  so  well  fed, 
probably  no  army  was  ever  so  well  clothed,  as 
that  of  the  United  States.  No  army  has  ever  had 
such  a  well-organized  and  devoted  corps  of  men 
and  women  to  care  for  wounded  and  sick.  And 
when  we  consider,  as  we  must  with  a  shudder,  the 
sufferings  of  Northern  soldiers  in  the  Southern 
prison  pens,  we  must  remember  that,  while  the 
worst  horrors  of  their  confinement  were  caused  by 
the  deliberate  neglect  and  brutality  of  those  in 
charge  of  their  camps,  their  coarse  food  and 
wretched  clothing  were  often  no  worse  than  those 
of  the  Southern  troops  in  the  front. 

Yet  there  were  still,  after  the  surrender  of  Lee 
and  Johnston,  many  thousands  of  men  under  arms, 
and  a  guerilla  warfare  would  have  been  possible. 
The  Mississippi  was  ploughed  from  its  source  to 
the  sea  by  Northern  steamers,  yet  the  troops  of 
Arkansas,  Texas,  and  Louisiana  had  still  managed 
to  reach  the  main  Confederate  armies.  Sherman 
made  his  magnificent  march  from  Atlanta  to  the 


^bc  IRoctb  anJ>  tbe  Soutb.  277 


sea,  and  the  country  closed  behind  him  uncon- 
quered  and  ungarrisoned.  But  the  very  magni- 
tude of  the  efforts  put  forth  by  the  South,  con- 
vinced it  in  1865  that  longer  resistance  was  useless. 
The  true  military  reason  for  the  collapse  of  the 
Confederacy  is  to  be  found,  not  so  much  in  the 
fearful  hammer-like  blows  of  Thomas,  Sherman, 
and  Grant,  as  in  the  efforts  of  an  unseen  enemy, 
the  ships  of  the  blockading  squadrons.  Never  in 
the  history  of  the  world  has  a  navy  been  called 
upon  to  perform  such  a  difficult  and  almost  impos- 
sible task  as  fell  to  the  American  Navy.  A  coast- 
line of  two  thousand  five  hundred  miles,  with  more 
than  thirty  ports  practicable  for  blockade  runners, 
was  so  sealed  up  that  the  South  was  thrown  upon 
its  own  resources.  The  struggle  could  not  be  pro- 
longed, because  the  army  could  be  neither  fed  nor 
supplied  from  the  cotton  bales.  The  wealth  of 
the  country  went  to  waste  because  it  could  not  be 
exchanged  for  the  foreign  products  essential  for 
the  prosecution  of  the  war. 

The  limited  military  resources  of  the  South 
were  made  less  available  because  of  the  lack  of 
sufificient  internal  transportation.  The  water-ways, 
both  on  the  rivers  and  to  the  eastward,  were  early 
occupied  or  blockaded  by  the  North.  Union  troops 
could  be  shipped  from  New  York  to  Hampton 
Roads,  or  to  Florida,  or  to  Mobile,  or  to  New  Or- 
leans ;  after  the  first  months  of  the  war  no  Con- 
federate troops  could  be  forwarded  by  sea.     The 


2/8  lEssags  on  ©overnment. 


country,  therefore,  was  thrown  upon  its  railroads. 
These  roads   were  few,   improperly  built,  as  had 
been  the  case  also  in  the  North,  and  they  steadily 
deteriorated.     When  the  rails  wore  out,  new  ones 
could  at  last  no  longer  be  provided  ;  when   loco- 
motives broke  down,   unless  a  Northern  prisoner 
consented   to  repair   them,    there   were   often    no 
mechanics  at  hand.     Important  links,  necessary  to 
complete  the  connection  between  the  Southwest 
and  the  coast  were  never  built.     The  raids  and 
the  lonsf  marches  at  the  end  of  the  war  so  com- 
pleted  the  ruin   of  the  railroads  that   there   was 
practically  nothing  left  of  them  but  the  road-beds. 
Thus  the  Confederates,  who  in  the  first  battle  of 
Bull  Run  were  the  first  combatants  in  history  to 
reinforce  an   army  in  line  of  battle  by  means  of  a 
railroad,  were   at   the   end    often   reduced  to  the 
Southern  "  dirt  roads,"  than  which  no  highway  can 
be  worse  ;  at  the  same  time  they  saw  their  old  rail- 
roads, repaired  and  mended  by  Northern  mechanics 
under  the  protection  of  Northern  troops,  bringing 
Northern  armies  down  to  complete  their  conquest. 
A  venerable  though    scarcely  reverent   proverb 
assures  us  that  God  is  on  the  side  of  the  strongest 
battalions.     The  battalions  of  the  North,  as   we 
have  seen,  were  stronger  than  those  of  the  South 
in  numbers,  in  resources,  in  military  supplies,  and 
in  means  of  communication.     The  Northern  people 
excelled  in  organization,  were  little,  if  at  all,  in- 
ferior  in    military  aptitude,  and    they    were    free 


Zbc  novtb  aiiD  tbe  Soutb.  279 


from  the  weakening  influence  of  slavery.  If  the 
forces  of  the  two  sections  were  all  drawn  out  and 
employed,  and  if  they  were  left  to  fight  their 
battles  alone,  the  North  must  therefore  in  the  end 
be  victorious.  Moreover,  the  North  had  such  a 
large  surplus  of  strength  and  resources  that  it 
might  do  less  than  its  utmost  and  still  overpower 
the  South.  The  North  never  put  forth  quite  its 
full  strength.  The  border  States  were  throughout 
the  war  occupied  as  advanced  posts ;  troops  were 
raised  in  them,  but  the  people  were  never  com- 
pletely trusted  ;  when,  after  1864,  it  was  seen  that 
slavery  was  to  be  destroyed  everywhere,  and  that 
the  compensation  to  their  slaves  once  refused  by 
the  border  States,  would  not  again  be  offered,  those 
States  continued  a  source  of  weakness  rather  than 
of  strength.  Throughout  the  Union,  indeed,  there 
was  opposition  to  the  war  or  to  the  manner  in 
which  it  was  carried  on.  As  wise  and  self-sus- 
tained a  President  as  Lincoln  felt  unable  to  with- 
stand the  pressure  to  appoint  officers  for  political 
rather  than  for  military  reasons. 

Nevertheless  the  v/ar  period  was  a  time  of  great 
commercial  and  economic  development.  Farms 
were  being  taken  up  in  the  West.  From  1861  to 
1865,  4,700,000  acres  of  the  public  domain  passed 
fr6m  the  ownership  of  the  Government  to  that  of 
settlers.  The  railroads  increased  from  3 1,286  miles 
to  35,085  miles,  or  one-eighth,  during  the  four  years 
of  war. 


28o  Essays  on  ©overnnicnt. 


Imports,  which  in  all  the  United  States,  includ- 
ing the  seceding  States,  had  been  in  i860,  362  mill- 
ions, in  1864  were  329  millions  for  the  loyal  States 
alone.  The  country  presented  the  striking  spec- 
tacle of  a  nation  advancing  from  year  to  year  in 
wealth  and  population,  while  fighting  an  expensive 
and  bloody  war.  The  total  number  of  enlistments 
and  re-enlistments  in  the  North  and  border  States 
during  the  four  years  of  the  war,  is  stated  at  2,859, 
132,  out  of  a  total  population  of  22,000,000,  and 
out  of  a  population  of  men  between  eighteen  and 
forty-five  of  4,470,000.  The  greatest  number  under 
arms  at  one  time  Vv^as  1,000,5  16,  May  i,  1865.  The 
enlistments  in  the  South  during  the  same  period, 
vv^ere  possibly  1,200,000  of  the  total  population. 
Both  sections  put  forth  all  the  effort  and  sent  for- 
ward all  the  men  that  the  country  could  be  induced 
to  furnish  ;  but  the  South,  because  standing  upon 
the  defensive,  repelling  invaders,  and  fighting  for 
independence,  was  able  to  call  forth  a  degree  of 
sacrifice  which  no  offensive  war  could  have  com- 
manded. 

From  the  middle  of  1862,  the  Northern  troops 
were  constantly  pressing  upon  the  South,  and 
occupying  one  belt  of  territory  after  another.  The 
result  was  a  loss  of  a  considerable  portion  of  the 
troops  who  might  have  been  raised  out  of  the 
conquered  regions.  As  grew  the  necessity  for  rais- 
ing men,  the  circle  narrowed  out  of  which  those 
men  could  be  raised ;  and,  as  hope  died  out,  men 


Zbe  mortb  aiiD  tbe  Soutb.  281 

deserted  by  thousands,  until  in  the  last  despairing 
days  of  the  Confederacy,  President  Davis  and 
General  Lee  agreed  that  the  last  possibility  of 
success  was  in  arming  the  negroes^  and  a  company 
of  black  convicts  from  the  Richmond  jails  was 
actually  organized. 

In  the  struggle  between  two  powers,  in  which 
one  had  such  a  superiority  of  numbers  and  of 
resources,  there  was  but  one  thing  which  could 
give  the  South  any  hope.  If  the  people  were 
superior  in  organization,  in  intelligence,  in  military 
aptitude,  in  moral  qualities,  they  might  still  stand 
out  against  the  overwhelming  odds,  and  might  se- 
cure their  independence.  Many  things  in  the  po- 
litical and  social  organization  of  the  South  adapted 
it  for  war.  In  the  first  place  the  South  had,  or  sup- 
posed it  had,  able  leaders,  both  civil  and  military. 
Jefferson  Davis,  who  was,  almost  without  oppo- 
sition, elected  to  be  President  of  the  Confederacy, 
was  a  man  of  both  civil  and  military  experience. 
As  Secretary  of  War,  under  President  Pierce,  he 
had  been  an  excellent  of^cial ;  as  a  graduate  of 
West  Point  and  an  officer,  he  had  seen  active 
service  in  the  Mexican  War.  He  believed,  with 
some  reason,  that  he  had  distinct  military  genius. 
In  fact,  it  is  related  on  Confederate  authority  that 
Mrs,  Davis  once  remarked  of  him  that  "  Jeff  had 
but  two  faults;  he  preferred  West  Point  graduates 
and  his  first  wife's  relations."  General  Braxton 
Bragg,  who  was  defeated  by  Sherman  at  Mission 


282  lEssa^s  on  Government. 

Ridcfe,  was  one  of  the  first  wife's  relations.     Davis 
was  believed    in   the   South  and  abroad  to  be   a 
statesman  of  ability  and  of  force.     This  reputation 
he  was  unable  to  justify,  because  he  was  continu- 
ally  called  upon  to  strain  the  powers  of  govern- 
ment to  their  utmost  limit,  and  perhaps  a  little 
farther.     When  disasters  came  showering  upon  the 
Confederacy,  there  was  a  natural  tendency  to  hold 
some   one  person  responsible,  and  there   was   an 
organized  opposition  against  Davis,  an  opposition 
represented  by  Pollard,    who  has   done  so  much 
through  his  "  Lost  Cause  "  to  tincture  the  popular 
impression  of   the  Confederacy  in  the  Civil  War. 
Stephens,    as   vice-president,    and   thus    removed 
from  the  active  control  of  affairs,  represented  what 
would   have  been    called  before  the   war  a  State 
Rights  tendency.     The  other  civil  leaders,  with  a 
few  exceptions,  showed  a  singular  incompetency. 
It  was  remarked  that  the  Confederate  Congress  was 
a  place  for  men  to  lose  the  reputation  which  they 
had    previously   acquired  in  Washington.     Presi- 
dent Davis's  Cabinet  was  made  up  in  great  part  of 
feeble  or  incapable  men.     One  Secretary  of  War, 
Mr.  Sedden,  excited  great  dissatisfaction  because 
it  was   found  that  he  had  fixed  an  official    price 
of  forty  dollars  per  bushel   for  wheat,  and  then 
had  sold  his  own   wheat  to  the   Government  at 
that    enhanced    price.       In    the    subordinate    de- 
partments of  Government,  incapacity  was  almost 
the  rule.     The  commercial  training  of  the  North 


Zbe  IWoitb  anJ)  tbe  Soutb.  283 

had  raised  up  a  race  of  capable  young  men  accus- 
tomed to  business  affairs.  In  every  regiment 
there  could  be  found  among  the  private  soldiers 
men  who  wrote  good  hands  and  could  keep  books, 
and  who  were  therefore  drawn  into  the  adjutant's 
and  commissariat's  departments.  In  the  South  it 
was  difficult  to  find  men  capable  of  understanding 
or  of  keeping  accounts,  and  throughout  the  war 
the  commissariat  was  the  most  hopelessly  insuffi- 
cient of  all  the  military  departments.  The  result 
was  a  waste  of  resource  and  effort.  In  the  book 
called  the  "  Rebel  War  Clerk's  Diary "  and  in 
George  Gary  Eggleston's  "  Rebel's  Recollections," 
are  recorded  many  entertaining  and  pathetic  inci- 
dents. Here  is  an  example  of  the  lack  of  organiza- 
tion and  business  system.  There  was  established 
in  Richmond  a  vexatious  system  of  passports, 
applying  as  well  to  civilians  as  to  soldiers.  It  was 
so  administered  as  to  cause  delay  and  expense  to 
persons  passing  through  the  city  on  business  for  the 
Government,  but  afforded  no  obstacle  to  spies  and 
illicit  traders.  Inquiry  was  finally  made  as  to  the 
authority  under  which  this  system  came  to  be 
established,  and  when  run  to  earth  it  appeared 
that  a  secretary  no  longer  in  office  had  given  an 
order,  which  he  had  not  ventured  to  commit  to 
writing. 

"  From  the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  war," 
says  an  officer,  "  the  commissariat  was  just  suf- 
ficiently well-managed  to  keep  the  troops  in  a  state 


284  JEssags  on  Government. 

of  semi-starvation.  On  one  occasion  the  company 
of  artillery  to  which  I  was  attached,  lived  for  thir- 
teen days  in  winter  quarters  on  a  daily  dole  of  half 
a  pint  of  cornmeal  per  man,  while  food  in  abun- 
dance was  stored  within  five  miles  of  its  camp — a 
railroad  uniting  the  two  places,  and  the  wagons  of 
the  battery  being  idle  all  the  time."  Nevertheless, 
with  all  the  defects  of  organization,  the  leaders 
understood  their  people,  and  they  were  able  to 
call  to  their  assistance  all  the  military  and  intellect- 
ual strength  of  the  country.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  political  system  of  the  South  had  accustomed 
the  people  to  pay  a  deference  to  leaders  unusual 
in  the  North.  The  distinction  of  classes  was  such 
that  a  rough  but  efficient  military  discipline  was 
possible.  Between  the  civil  and  military  leaders 
there  existed  a  far  greater  degree  of  harmony  than 
in  the  North.  It  was  notorious  that  President 
Davis  disliked  General  Joe  Johnston ;  but,  on  the 
other  hand,  from  1862  to  1865,  while  the  army  of 
the  Potomac  fought  under  eight  different  com- 
manders, the  Southern  Army  of  Virginia  never 
was  removed  from  the  command  of  Robert  E. 
Lee. 

It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  the  Southern  Con- 
federacy, formed  as  a  protest  against  the  alleged 
centralizing  tendencies  of  the  United  States  Gov- 
ernment, suffered  a  greater  degree  of  centralization 
than  its  rival  in  Washington.  The  conscription 
of  troops  was  carried  to  such  a  degree  that  Gov- 


mK  moitb  aiiD  the  South.  285 

ernor  Brown  of  Georgia  refused  in  set  terms  to 
permit  the  Confederate  recruiting  officers  to  exer- 
cise their  functions  within  his  State.  In  Decem- 
ber, 1862,  was  made  a  /cvc'e  en  masse  of  the  able- 
bodied  male  population  between  the  ages  of 
eighteen  and  forty-five.  The  familiar  practice  by 
which,  since  the  Civil  War,  men  connected  with 
the  Confederate  Army  have  been  preferred  in  the 
elections  in  the  South,  is  due  not  so  much  to  a  wish 
to  show  them  honor,  as  to  the  fact  that  almost 
every  man  of  any  force  of  character  was  compelled 
by  public  sentiment  to  enter  the  army.  One  rea- 
son for  the  concentration  of  power  in  the  Con- 
federacy was  that  the  Supreme  Court,  which  was 
to  have  formed  a  department  of  the  Government, 
was  never  organized.  There  was,  therefore,  no 
legal  check  upon  the  Congress  or  the  President. 
Whatever  the  Confederacy  contained  in  money,  in 
men,  in  supplies,  in  food,  could  be  brought  into 
the  service  of  the  Government. 

The  internal  workings  of  the  Confederate  Gov- 
ernment were  by  no  means  smooth.  Almost  from 
the  beginning  there  was  in  Congress  an  organized 
opposition  to  President  Davis.  As  that  body  sat 
usually  in  secret  session,  the  details  of  the  attacks 
upon  the  President  and  his  policy  have  not  been 
made  public.  But  the  following  extract  from 
Pollard's  "  Lost  Cause,"  the  work  of  an  editor  of 
the  Richmond  Examiner,  shows  the  spirit  of  his 
opponents  toward  the  end  of  the  war : 


286  B5oa\j5  on  (government, 

"The  influence  of  President  Davis  was  almost 
entirely  gone,  and  .  .  .  the  party  which  sup- 
ported him  was  scarcely  anything  more  than  that 
train  of  followers  which  always  fawns  on  power 
and  lives  on  patronage  .  .  .  all  the  public 
measures  of  Mr.  Davis's  administration  had  come 
to  be  wrecks  ...  it  was  no  longer  possible  to 
dispute  the  question  of  maladministration." 

A  recent  examination  of  the  Confederate  Jour- 
nals of  Congress,  shows  that  President  Davis  in 
his  four  years  of  service  vetoed  thirty-eight  bills,  of 
which  but  one,  an  unimportant  measure  for  the 
forwarding  of  newspapers  to  the  soldiers  without 
payment  of  postage,  was  passed  over  the  veto. 
During  the  same  period  of  four  years.  President 
Lincoln  vetoed  but  three  bills. 

The  relations  between  the  Confederate  Govern- 
ment and  the  States  were  closer  than  between  the 
United  States  and  its  members.  Almost  the  only 
case  of  conflict  between  the  Confederate  and  the 
State  authorities  was  the  refusal  of  Governor 
Brown  to  permit  conscription  in  Georgia.  There 
are,  however,  two  other  interesting  instances  of  local 
opposition  to  Confederate  authorities.  Resolu- 
tions were  adopted  in  November,  1861,  by  the 
people  of  Winston  County,  Alabama,  setting  forth 
the  fact  that  515  Union  men  were  still  to  be  found 
in  that  county  against  128  "secessionists  and  legal 
voters,"  of  whom  70  were  in  the  Confederate  Army. 
The  Unionists  still  refused  to  assist  the   Confeder- 


Zbe  mortF)  aiiD  tbc  South.  287 

acy,  and  were  organized  in  military  companies.  A 
much  more  amusing  case  is  that  of  Jones  County, 
Mississippi.  The  3,300  people  of  this  county  be- 
came tired  of  the  burdens  of  the  Civil  War,  and  by 
a  convention  held  in  1862  formally  seceded  from 
the  State  and  Confederacy  : 

"Whereas,  the  State  of  Mississippi,  for  reasons 
which  appear  justifiable,  has  seen  fit  to  withdraw 
from  the  Federal  Union,  and  whereas  we,  the 
citizens  of  Jones  County,  claim  the  same  right, 
thinking  our  grievances  are  sufficient  by  reason  of 
an  unjust  law  passed  by  the  Confederate  States  of 
America,  forcing  us  to  go  to  distant  parts,  etc., 
etc.  Therefore,  be  it  resolved,  that  we  sever  the 
union  heretofore  existing  between  Jones  County 
and  the  State  of  Mississippi,  and  proclaim  our  In- 
dependence of  the  said  State,  and  of  the  Con- 
federate States  of  America- — and  we  solemnly 
call  upon  Almighty  God  to  witness  and  bless  the 
act." 

A  resolution  offering  their  alliance  to  the  United 
States  was  not  adopted.  The  sovereign  nation  of 
Jones  County  with  its  president,  cabinet.  Congress, 
code  of  laws,  and  conscription  and  confiscation  acts 
— nailed  to  trees,  since  there  was  no  newspaper  in 
the  commonwealth — was  able  for  some  time  to 
maintain  itself  in  the  midst  of  the  swamps  against 
the  troops  sent  to  subdue  it.  Finally,  by  the  aid 
of  field  guns  the  infant  commonwealth  was  over- 
come and  the  authority  of  the  Confederacy  was  re- 


2t>8  j£56ag6  on  (Bovci-nniciit. 

stored.*  The  swift  and  ruthless  exercise  of  military 
powers,  wherever  the  Confederacy  had  authority, 
is  in  striking  contrast  with  the  halting  military 
relations  between  the  United  States  of  America 
and  the  States  composing  it.  Among  the  Northern 
States  there  were  always  unsettled  questions  of 
the  supply  of  troops  and  of  the  apportionment  of 
quotas. 

As  a  military  agent,  then,  the  Southern  Con- 
federacy was  decidedly  superior  to  the  Union  ;  and 
this  superiority  was  due  in  part  to  a  habit  of  def- 
erence and  obedience  to  command  uncommon  to 
the  North,  in  part  to  the  fact  that  the  President 
himself  was  a  military  man,  in  part  to  the  arbitrary 
character  of  the  government,  in  part  to  the  per- 
sonal character  and  the  permanence  of  the  military 
commanders. 

This  advantage  was  to  a  large  degree  offset  by 
the  inferior  intelligence  of  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
Confederate  armies.  Professor  Hosmer,  in  the 
title  of  one  of  his  books,  "  The  Thinking  Bayonet," 
suggests  the  essential  of  good  military  service.  In 
the  ruder  warfare  of  ancient  and  mediaeval  times, 
the  strength  of  an  army  was  the  sum  of  the  physi- 
cal strength  of  its  members  ;  since  the  introduc- 
tion of  long-range  weapons,  the  efficiency  of  the 

*  This  incident  is  related  on  the  authority  of  the  Magazine  of 
American  History,  October,  i886  (vol.  xvi.,  pp.  387-390).  To  a 
criticism  of  the  statement  the  autlior  of  this  essay  has  replied  in 
the  Nation  of  March  31,  1892  (vol.  liv,,  p.  245). 


XLbc  novtb  an^  tbe  Soutb.  289 

soldier  depends  not  upon  his  ability  to  wield  a  two- 
handed  sword,  but  upon  his  ability  to  march,  to 
bear  hardship,  and  to  keep  cool.  Intelligent  troops 
have,  therefore,  a  fundamental  advantage  over  the 
less  intelligent,  and  in  this  respect  the  South  was 
from  the  beginning  handicapped.  The  highest 
classes  in  the  South,  and  particularly  the  military 
officers,  were  well  educated.  Jefferson  in  1820  had 
complained  that  "  Harvard  will  still  prime  it  over 
us  with  her  twenty  professors,"  while  Princeton 
was  half  Virginian,  and  five  hundred  young  men 
were  "  at  college  in  the  North  imbibing  principles 
contrary  to  those  of  their  own  country."  The 
sending  of  Southern  young  men  of  wealth  to  North- 
ern colleges  continued  ;  but  the  population  from 
which  the  rank  and  file  of  the  Confederate  Army 
was  taken  was  ignorant,  and  a  large  number  were 
illiterate.  Of  the  2,500,000  white  persons  above 
the  age  of  twenty  in  the  South  in  i860,  412,256 
could  neither  read  nor  write.  Of  3,100  newspapers 
and  periodicals  published  in  1861,  the  South  had 
but  703.  Nor  was  the  deficiency  in  book  educa- 
tion atoned  for  by  a  larger  experience  of  life.  The 
Southern  soldiers  had  most  of  them  spent  their 
lives  within  a  radius  of  a  few  miles.  They  were 
unaccustomed  to  variety,  unable  to  endure  violent 
changes.  It  is  a  striking  fact,  attested  by  the 
most  trustworthy  statistics,  that  the  percentage  of 
Southern  prisoners  who  died  in  the  well-conducted 
Northern  prison  of  Elmira,  was  greater  than  the 
19 


290  lEssags  on  Oovcnimcnt. 

percentage  of  Northern  prisoners  who  died  in  An- 
derson ville.  The  reason  for  this  difference,  as 
stated  by  surgeons  who  saw  Northern  and  Southern 
men  in  the  same  hospital  wards,  is  simply  that  the 
Southern  men  lacked  the  endurance  possessed  by 
men  more  accustomed  to  change.  One  such  sur- 
geon is  accustomed  to  say  that  no  men  habitually 
fed  on  corn  bread  could  compete  with  men  habit- 
ually fed  on  wheat  bread.  Differences  of  diet,  of 
habit,  of  climate,  had  tended  to  make  out  of  the 
South  a  race  easily  incited  to  the  fiercest  of  rapid 
effort,  but  which  was  less  able  to  bear  continuous 
fighting  and  hardship. 

The  Southern  leaders  were,  of  course,  aware  of 
the  fact  that  their  followers  lacked  education,  but 
they  believed  that  they  possessed  a  superior  mili- 
tary aptitude.  At  the  beginning  of  the  contest, 
the  South  was  able  more  quickly  to  raise  and  to 
discipline  troops,  because  the  number  of  men  ac- 
customed to  handle  the  gun  was  larger.  The 
troops  for  the  Mexican  War  had  been  raised  in 
considerable  part  in  the  South,  and  the  discipline 
and  experience  of  that  contest  were  therefore 
gained  chiefly  by  the  Confederacy.  In  officers  the 
South  was  as  rich  as  the  North,  because  the  West 
Point  cadetships  had  been  held  almost  in  equal 
number  from  the  two  sections,  and  the  Southern- 
ers who  held  them  had  been  m.ore  likely  to  con- 
tinue in  military  service,  and  to  gain  promotion. 
When  the  Civil  War  broke  out,  a  large  number  of 


Zbc  IRoitb  anO  tbe  Soutb.  291 


those  officers  surrendered  to  the  authorities  of  the 
Southern  Confederacy  the  posts  which  they  com- 
manded. Albert  Sidney  Johnston,  in  command  of 
the  post  of  San  Francisco,  sternly  put  aside  all 
suggestions  that  he  should  follow  their  example, 
placed  the  post  in  the  hands  of  an  officer  appointed 
to  succeed  him,  and  then  resigned  his  command 
and  entered  the  Confederate  service. 

The  confidence  of  the  officers  in  their  material 
was  on  the  whole  justified.  An  accurate  compari- 
son between  the  Northern  and  Southern  volun- 
teers is  almost  impossible,  because  their  conditions 
were  never  equalized.  Clothe  the  Northern 
soldier  in  the  ragged  butternut  uniform,  feed  him 
on  irregular  and  insufficient  rations,  scantily  pro- 
vide him  with  tents  and  cooking  utensils,  and  then 
call  upon  him  to  face  the  Southern  soldier,  well 
clothed,  well  housed,  well  fed,  and  followed  by  a 
beneficent  sanitary  commission — and  though  the 
Northern  soldier  under  such  conditions  would  have 
fought  well,  he  could  not  have  fought  better  than 
his  Southern  rivals.  All  military  authorities  unite 
in  their  praise  of  that  ill-uniformed  and  motley 
army  which  cheerfully  followed  "  Uncle  Robert  " 
through  the  year  1864,  in  a  campaign  which  they 
themselves  believed  to  be  hopeless.  More  active 
troops  than  "  Stonewall  Jackson's  foot  cavalry " 
never  surprised  an  enemy  by  their  capacity  to  be 
in  two  distant  places  on  the  same  day.  Braver 
and  more  determined   hearts  never  beat  beneath 


292  jEssags  on  «3orcinment. 

a  uniform  than  those  in  Pickett's  division  in 
the  awful  charge  upon  the  Union  lines  at  Get- 
tysburg. What  men  could  do  with  insufificient 
food  and  material  of  war,  the  Southern  troops 
accomplished. 

In  one  branch  of  the  service  the  Confederates 
were,  until  well  into  the  war,  decidedly  superior. 
Accustomed  as  the  men  of  the  South  were  to  the 
saddle,  their  cavalry  was  much  more  efficient  until 
Northern  commanders  like  Charles  Russell  Lowell, 
Wilson,  and  Sheridan  learned  the  Southern  tactics 
from  their  opponents.  The  light  cavalry,  the  eyes 
of  the  army,  which  made  bold  dashes  into  the 
Federal  Territory,  cut  the  communications  of  the 
Federal  armies,  and  threatened  cities  far  removed 
from  the  front — that  light  cavalry  was  at  last  suc- 
cessfully imitated  and  repelled  by  Sheridan. 

In  considering  the  population  of  the  Confeder- 
ate States  as  compared  with  that  of  the  Northern 
States,  we  saw  that  it  was  about  9,000,000  to  about 
22,000,000.  In  that  estimate  we  took  no  account 
of  the  fact  that  of  the  able-bodied  Southerners 
more  than  one-third  could  not  be  accepted  as  sol- 
diers. In  the  seceding  States  there  were,  in  i860, 
3,511,110  slaves,  and  432,586  free  colored  persons, 
making  a  total  of  3,943,696  negroes.  This  leaves 
5,447,219  white  persons,  of  whom  1,064,193  were 
of  military  age,  to  carry  on  a  struggle  with  18,825,- 
275  white  persons  in  the  North,  to  whom  it  is  fair 
to  add  2,650,243  in  the  border  States — thus  includ- 


Zbc  mortb  an£)  tbc  Soutb.  293 

ing  a  military  population  of  about  4,500,000.  The 
men  of  the  South  now  know,  as  the  men  of  the 
North  came  to  understand  late  in  the  war,  and  as 
foreign  observers  like  Cairnes  had  shown  almost 
before  the  war  began,  that  the  real  contest  was  for 
the  perpetuation  or  the  destruction  of  slavery  ;  yet 
from  the  moment  the  first  shot  was  fired  on 
Fort  Sumter,  to  the  surrender  of  the  last  com- 
mand in  1865,  that  slavery  for  which  the  South 
was  half-unconsciously  fighting  was  itself  under- 
mining and  destroying  the  Confederacy.  '  There 
were  many  points  of  difference  between  the  North 
and  South,  there  were  many  mutual  accusations  of 
aggression  and  of  bad  faith.  They  all,  however, 
came  down  to  the  simple  undeniable  truth  that  the 
North  was  opposed  to  slavery  and  meant  to  put 
an  end  to  it,  wherever  it  could  be  reached  ;  that 
the  South  accepted  slavery  as  an  inevitable  insti- 
tution, and  would  permit  no  interference,  direct 
or  indirect.  But  for  slavery,  the  question  of  seces- 
sion and  the  right  of  secession  could  not  have 
come  up  ;  but  for  slavery  there  could  have  been 
no  disposition  to  fire  on  Fort  Sumter  and  no 
necessity  to  defend  it ;  but  for  slavery  the  two 
sections  might  have  lived  on  with  reasonable  peace 
and  good  feeling.  When  the  war  was  once  be- 
gun, the  Northern  people  realized,  not  that  slav- 
ery could  be  destroyed  by  war,  but  that  the 
war  could  be  ended  by  destroying  slavery.  From 
the  time  of  the  President's  preliminary  proclama- 


294  B60a\>0  on  Government. 


tion  in  September,  1862,  it  was  evident  that  slav- 
ery could  be  retained  only  by  the  success  of  the 
South.     For  slavery  as  well  as  independence,  the 
South  was  fighting ;  and  slavery  weakened  every 
blow  that  was  struck  and  every  arm  that  struck  a 
blow.     To  be  sure,  the  South  was  able  to  enlist 
almost  the  whole  able-bodied   white  population, 
because  there  was  a  population  of  slaves  to  till  the 
fields  and  perform   necessary  service.     The  slaves 
assisted  to  construct  fortifications  and  were  useful 
as  body  servants  in  campaigns  ;  but  to  put  muskets 
into  their  hands  meant  practically  that  they  must 
be  freed.     The  contingency  of  slave  insurrections 
the  Southern   leaders  did  not  fear,  and  the  event 
proved  the  justice  of  their  confidence  in  the  African 
race.     As  a  Southern  speaker  has  said  :  "  A  single 
brand   flung  into  our  houses  would  have  caused 
our  armies   to   be    dissolved — and    not   one    Avas 
flung."     There  appears  to  have  been  no  case  of  a 
serious  slave  rising  in  any  part  of  the  South,  from 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  the  Civil   War.     Yet 
the  slaves  proved  in  other  ways  a  distinct  source  of 
weakness  :  wherever  it  was  possible,  and  sometimes 
in  circumstances  of  great  difficulty,  they  gave  in- 
formation to  the   Union  troops  ;    they  were  our 
friends,  and  almost  our  only  friends,  in  a  region  of 
the  enemy.     And  although   the  slaves  refused  to 
rise,  they  had   no  conscientious  scruples   against 
running  away.     From   the  very  beginning  of  the 
Civil  War,  therefore,  our  commanders  experienced 


^be  IWortb  ajiD  tbc  Soutb.  295 

the  embarrassing  presence  in  camp  of  negro  refu- 
gees, not  only  from  the  inside  of  the  hostile  lines, 
but  from  the  loyal  residents  of  the  border  States. 
To  return  them  meant  to  give  additional  means  to 
our  enemies;  to  retain  them  was  an  offence  to  our 
Southern  friends.     It  was  the  service  of  an  Amer- 
ican general,  whom    nature    had    endowed   with 
more  wit  than  consistency,  to  dub  this  unfortunate 
class    "contraband  of   war."     After    a  very    few 
months,  fugitives  were  no  longer  returned  either 
to   enemies  or  friends  ;  and    almost    every   black 
throughout  the  South  knew  that  should  he  once 
reach  the    Union    lines    he  was    practically   free. 
Out  of  the  embarrassment  caused  by  the  presence 
of  these  people,  who  had  to  be  employed  and  often 
to  be  fed  at  Government  expense,  there  sprang  a 
measure  which  enabled  the  North  in  1863-65  to 
preserve  that  superiorit}^  of  force  which  was  neces- 
sary in  order  to  fight  the  war  to  the  end.     Of  these 
black  refugees  there  were  enlisted  as  soldiers  no 
less  than   186,097  troops.     They  replaced  North- 
ern  troops   in   garrison  duty,  they  fought  beside 
them  in   the  field,  and   when  the  United  States 
Government  hesitated  to  squeeze  out  of  reluctant 
States  the  additional  number  of  men  necessary  for 
the  reinforcement  of  its  armies,  those  men  were 
found  among  the  slaves  of  the  Southern  planters. 

In  still  another  sense  slavery  was  the  cause  of 
the  military  defeat  of  the  South.  We  have  al- 
ready seen  that  the  population  of  the  North  had 


2g6  jBB6n^6  on  Oovcinmcnt. 

received  large  accessions  through  immigration. 
Those  accessions  were  denied  to  the  South  chiefly 
because  of  slavery.  The  total  number  of  foreigners 
found  in  the  eleven  seceding  States  is  i860  was 
about  233,000,  of  whom  one-fourth  were  in  New 
Orleans.  The  man  who  crossed  the  ocean  to  find 
more  favorable  conditions  of  life  was  not  likely  to 
choose  a  settlement  in  a  part  of  the  country  in 
which  labor  was  considered  the  mark  of  an  inferi- 
or. Still  more  were  the  material  wealth  and  mili- 
tary resources  of  the  South  diminished  by  slavery. 
The  land  was  not  less  fertile,  but,  as  we  have  seen, 
while  the  population  of  the  slave  States  in  1869 
was  two-thirds  that  of  the  other  States,  their  land 
was  worth  but  one-third  as  much  as  that  of  the 
free  States  ;  and  the  methods  of  agriculture  which 
impoverished  the  Southern  lands  and  prevented 
their  development  grew  out  of  slavery.  The  staple 
cotton  crop  was  not  cultivated  merely  because  it 
was  easily  sold.  It  was  cultivated  because  it  was 
profitable  to  raise  it  by  large  gangs  of  ignorant 
men.  Manufactures  were  ignored,  not  because 
Southerners  did  not  appreciate  their  importance, 
but  because  it  was  impossible  to  carry  them  on 
efificiently  or  profitably  with  slave  labor.  The  im- 
ports of  the  country  were  small,  not  merely  be- 
cause it  was  poor,  but  because  so  large  a  por- 
tion of  the  population  was  legally  disqualified 
from  buying  anything  for  itself.  The  accumula- 
tions of  capital  were  small  because  the  system  of 


^be  mortb  aiiD  the  Soutb.  297 

slave  labor  failed  to  encourage  the  savings  and  the 
investments  which  made  the  wealth  of  the  North. 
The  inefficient  management  of  the  financial  affairs 
of  the  Confederacy  was  due  in  great  part  to  the 
want  of  training  in  business  habits,  a  result  of  the 
primitive  methods  of  agriculture  and  of  transit. 
The  inability  to  keep  up  the  railroads  and  to  deal 
with  sudden  emergencies  in  time  of  war,  the  in- 
feriority in  bridge-building  and  in  ship-building — 
all  these  were  due,  in  great  part,  to  the  fact  that 
the  South  had  for  more  than  three-quarters  of  a 
century  deliberately  chosen  a  system  of  slavery, 
while  the  neighboring  States  had  deliberately 
chosen  a  system  of  freedom. 

It  is  the  favorite  theory  of  political  writers  that 
there  was  in  1S60  a  distinct  difference  between 
Northern  and  Southern  character,  arising  out  of 
the  fact  that  the  dominant  element  in  the  North 
was  descended  from  the  Puritan,  and  in  the  South 
was  descended  from  the  Cavalier.  It  is  now 
established  that  no  such  difference  of  origin  can  be 
proven.  The  Virginian  and  the  Maryland  planters, 
the  New  Jersey  Quakers,  and  the  Connecticut  and 
Massachusetts  settlers  sprang  from  the  same  class 
in  England.  The  elements  chiefly  represented  in 
all  the  colonies  at  the  time  of  their  foundation 
w^ere  the  intelligent  yeomanry  and  small  land- 
owners. The  aristocracy  of  which  the  South 
boasted  so  much  was  not  descended  from  the 
younger  or  the  older  sons  of  English  men  of  rank ; 


298  :iE00as0  on  (Boveiuinent. 

it  was  made  up  of  the  sons  and  grandsons  and 
great-grandsons  of  those  planters  who  were  the 
first  by  their  shrewdness  and  energy  to  acquire 
large  landed  estates.  The  climate  had  brought 
about  some  changes,  and  in  the  South  there  had 
been  developed  a  class  of  small  landowners,  the  so- 
called  poor  whites,  who  had  but  little  improved 
during  the  century  previous  to  the  Civil  War, 
The  original  bases  of  the  white  population  were, 
however,  the  same.  The  great  and  fundamental 
difference  between  the  sections  was  that  in  one  of 
them  the  presence  of  a  dependent  race,  and  still 
more  the  existence  of  human  slavery,  had  affected 
the  social  and  the  economic  life  of  the  people ; 
that  the  productive  energies  of  the  North  were 
employed  while  those  of  the  South  were  dormant. 
The  iron,  the  coal,  the  lumber,  and  the  grain  of 
the  North  were  drawn  out  by  the  intelligent  com- 
bination of  the  labor  of  the  whole  people;  while 
in  the  South  they  remained  undeveloped  because 
it  seemed  to  the  commercial  interest  of  the  large 
landowners  to  perpetuate  a  system  of  agriculture 
founded  on  African  slavery.  For  this  mistake,  for 
this  preference  for  a  system  which  had  been  aban- 
doned by  all  other  nations  of  the  Teutonic  race,  the 
South  paid  a  fearful  penalty  in  the  Civil  War. 
Slavery  had  enfeebled  the  defenders  of  slavery, 
and  they  and  the  institution  which  they  strove  to 
protect  fell  together. 


INDEX. 


ABS 

ABSTENTION  from  voting,  actual 
proportion,  30,  33  ;  reasons,  30- 
32,  47-52  ;  proper  remedy,  53. 

Accomac  County,  of  Virginia,  147. 

Act  of  Congress,  biography  of,  206-232. 

Adams,  John  Quincy,  attempts  to  cen- 
sure. :2  ;  choice  as  President,  72. 

Adams,  Sam,  moderator  in  Boston, 
139  ;  as  a  committee  member,  141  ; 
a  political  leader,  144. 

Agricultural  colleges,  245. 

Alabama,  county  government  in,  147  ; 
land  grant  to,  248  ;  Union  men  in, 
286. 

Alaska,  area,  235  ;  land  in.  236. 

Aliens,  men  in  the  United  States,  25  ; 
admitted  to  the  suffrage,  64. 

Alien  voters,  proportion  of,  27. 

Allen,  Rev.  Thomas,  influence  in  town 
meeting,  144. 

Altoona,  causes  of  growth,  172. 

Amendments,  bills  in  Congress,  214- 
220. 

America,  attitude  of  United  States 
toward,  99-100. 

Anderson,  Mr.,  a  filibusterer,  216. 

Annexatiom  of  territory,  235,  238,  242  ; 
area,  255. 

Appointments,  effect  of  political,  82  ; 
President's  desire  for  good  adminis- 
tration, 83  :  desire  to  gratify  friends, 
84  :  imbedded   in   the  Constitution, 

89-       .     . 

Appropriations,  committee  on,  209 ; 
estimates  for,  209  ;  in  a  lump  sum, 
216. 

Arkansas,  aids  Confederacy,  276. 

Army,  in  Civil  War.  -SVt"  The  United 
States 

Army,  officers  permanent,  90  ;  enlist- 
ments, 286 ;  officers,  resignations, 
290,  291. 


BEL 

Arthur,  President,  bills  presented  to, 
6  ;  question  of  place  of  birth,  68  ; 
commission  to  Latin  -  American 
states,  104. 

Athens,  choice  of  site,  164,  165. 

Atlanta,  foreign  population  in,  191  ; 
captured,  264-266. 

Australia,  cities  in,  185. 

Australian  Ballot,  applied  to  the  suf- 
frage, 32. 


BALLOT,  not  a  talisman,  39  ;  in 
colonial  town  meeting,  141. 

Balmaceda,  President,  quarrel  with 
Chilean  Congress,  106  ;  character  of, 
107  :  friendly  toward  Egan,  109  ; 
interest  iu  sub-marine  cable,  no: 
notified  of  Congressionalists'  landmg, 
112;  asks  favors  of  the  United  States, 
114  ;  refuge  of,  118. 

Baltimore,  choice  of  site,  166,  167 ; 
reasons  for  growth,  168  ;  railroad  to, 
168  ;  immigrants  land,  172 :  early 
railroad,  178  ;  rival  of  Boston,  187  ; 
foreigners  in,  193  ;  negroes,  193  ; 
native  white  population,  193  ;  origin 
of  urban  population,  203  ;  derivation 
of  foreigners,  204 ;  foreign  popula- 
tion, 269. 

Baltimore,  United  States  ship  of  war, 
assault  on  sailors  of,  99  ;  sailors  at- 
tacked at  Valparaiso,  115  ;  delay  in 
investigation,  123. 

Baltimore  &  Ohio  Railroad,  168. 

Barrundia,  cases  of,  120. 

Bayard,  Secretary,  on  Bering  Sea, 
129. 

Bay  City,  foreign  population  in,  191. 

Belize,  English  claim  to,  131. 

Bellingham,  Mass.,  proposition  for 
county  councils,  155. 


(299) 


300 


1[n^eJ. 


bp:r 

Bering  Sea,  cabinet  controversy  on, 
129. 

Berkshire  County,  belligerent  action  of, 
160. 

Bibliography  of  compulsory  voting,  21. 

Bibliography  of  the  suffrage,  23-32. 

Bill,  biography  of,  206-232  ;  in  Con- 
gress (see  River  and  Harbor  Bill)  ; 
title  of,  213. 

Bills,  submitted  to  the  President,  5  ; 
signed  in  the  last  days  of  the  ses- 
sion. 6 ;  reported  by  committees, 
6-9. 

Blaine,  Secretary,  anxious  to  address 
Congress,  4  ;  James  G.,  candidate 
for  presidency,  12  :  speeches  during 
campaign,  60  ;  effect  of  Mugwump 
vote  on,  76 :  action  toward  Chile, 
iot  ;  character  of,  107  ;  disavows 
Commander  Evans,  113  ;  on  the  New 
Orleans  massacres,  116  ;  forbear- 
ance for  Chile,  117  ;  attitude  toward 
Chilean  refugees,  120  ;  attitude  tow- 
ard Malta's  circular,  122  ;  hint  as 
to  Egan,  125  ;  overruled  as  to  Chile, 
127. 

Blair,  Senator,  on  civil  service  reform, 
81. 

Bliicher,  opinion  of  London,  164. 

Bohemians,  in  cities,  193. 

Border  States.     See  States. 

Boston,  vote  in  municipal  elections,  36  ; 
votes  in  town  meeting,  45  ;  vote  tab- 
ulated, 54  ;  colonial  town  meeting  m, 
133  ;  town  meeting,  frequency,  134  ; 
suffrage  in,  137  ;  place  of  assem- 
blage, 138  ;  moderators,  139  ;  length, 
140;  ballot  stuffing,  141  ;  political 
functions,  146  ;  town  meeting,  place 
of  assemblage,  138  ;  reasons  for 
growth,  168  ;  railroads  late,  178  ;  fut- 
ure of,  189 ;  colored  quarters  in, 
200 ;  choice  of  site,  166  ;  good  har- 
bor, 167  ;  dependent  on  the  West, 
169  ;  port  for  immigranls,  171  ; 
parks,  174  ;  popular  government  in, 
174  ;  effect  of  State  legislature,  175  ; 
reasons  for  growth,  180;  rivalry  with 
Baltimore,  187  ;  proportion  of  foreign- 
ers, 191  ;  immigrants  from  other 
parts  of  the  United  States,  194  ;  ex- 
cess of  adult  foreigners,  196;  excess 
of  adults,  197  ;  excess  of  women,  199; 
foreign  population  in,  204 ;  status 
of  population  in  1885,  205  ;  origin  of 
urban  population,  203  ;  derivation  of 
foreign  population,  204. 

Bragg,  Braxton,  connection  with  Da- 
vis, 281. 


CHI 

Bribery,  effect  of  compulsory  voting, 
50  ;  in  presidential  elections,  61. 

Bright,  John,  supports  the  North,  260. 

British  Americans,  in  cities,  204. 

Brockton,  population,  189. 

Brooklyn,  how  fed,  169 ;  adjunct  of 
New  York,  180  ;  comparative  popu- 
lation,   184  ;    foreign   population   in. 

Brown,  Admiral,  connection  with  at- 
tack on  Santiago,  112  ;  his  explana- 
tion, 113. 

Brown,  B.  Grat2,  in  presidential  elec- 
tion of  1872,  69. 

Brown,  Governor,  quarrel  with  Davis, 
285-286. 

Buchanan,  James,  not  renominated, 
59  :  a  minority  President,  74. 

Buffalo,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  foreign 
population  in,  191-193. 

Bull  Run,  Battle  of,  262,  278. 

Burr,  election  of  as  Vice-President,  67 

-71-  ,  .     . 

Butler,  gap  in  his  lines,  276. 

CABINET,  in  England,  1-3  ;  in  the 
United  States,  4;  attempts  to 
address  Congress,  4  ;  members  urge 
bills  before  committees,  9  ;  bellig- 
erency of,  129  ;  of  Southern  Con- 
federacy, 282. 

Cairne.s,  supports  the  North,  260. 

Cairo,  a  decaying  town,  177. 

Calhoun,  advocates  railroads,  178. 

California,  vote  in  1880,  80 ;  annexa- 
tion of.  104  :  title  to,  235  ;  private 
land  claims,  238. 

Cambridge,  foreign  population  in,  191. 

Campaign,  presidential,  58  ;  work  of 
the  national  committee,  60. 

Canada,  railroad  connections,  188. 

Canadian  immigrants  to  United 
States,  193. 

Canal,  Erie,  168. 

Canals,  land  grants  for,  248. 

Carlisle,  Speaker,  refuses  to  recognize 
a  member,  13-14. 

Cavalier  element  in  Colonies,  297. 

Census  of  1890,  accuracy  questioned, 

25- 

Charleston,  site  of,  167  ;  reasons  for 
growth,  168;  excess  of  negroes,  194. 

Charters,  cities.     See  Cities. 

Chicago,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  a  trade 
centre,  169  ;  park  system,  174  ;  at 
head  of  navigation,  179  ;  reasons  for 
growth,  181  :  rapid  growth,  187  ; 
foreign  population,  191  ;  total  for- 
eigners, 192;  Germans,  192;  Poles, 


IfuDej. 


301 


CHI 

193  ;  immigration  from  other  parts  of 
the  United  States,  194  ;  origin  of 
urban  population,  203  ;  foreigners  in, 
204. 

Chile,  controversy  with,  98-132  ;  apol- 
ogizes, 99  ;  war  talk  toward,  99  ;  co- 
lonial, loi  ;  dispute  with  Peru,  102  ; 
compared  with  the  United  States, 
101-103  ;  geographical  and  economic 
situation  of,  103  ;  changes  in,  since 
l88i,  105;  revolution  in,  106  ;  Presi- 
dent of.  107;  Egan  appointed  minis- 
ter to,  107  ;  expected  success  of 
Balmaceda,  110  ;  difficulties  with 
the  United  States,  m  ;  controversy 
with  Commander  Evans,  113  ; 
change  in  foreign  department,  115  ; 
mob  in  Valparaiso,  115  ;  diplomacy 
of  delay,  116  ;  question  of  the  refu- 
gees, 117  ;  exasperation  over  the 
refugees,  118;  hesitation  to  apologize, 
123  ;  apology  by,  124  ;  apology  un- 
satisfactorj',  125  ;  war  threatened  by 
the  United  States.  126;  final  apol- 
ogy, 127  ;  insolent  tone,  128  :  resent- 
ment toward  the  Ignited  States,  130. 

Chinese,  exclusion  from  suffrage,  24, 
25  ;  cannot  be  naturalized,  26  :  letter 
on  labor,  79  ;  distribution  in  cities, 
192. 

Choice  of  colonial  officers,  145. 

Cincinnati,  foreign  population  in,  191, 
192  ;  origin  of  urban  population, 
203  ;   derivation  of  foreigners,  204. 

Cities,  American,  rise  of,  162-205  : 
government  of,  162  ;  rapid  growth 
of,  163  ;  meaning  of  the  term,  163  ; 
not  defensible,  164  :  situated  on 
rivers,  165  ;  situated  on  harbors, 
166  ;  connection  with  interior.  168  ; 
trade  centres,  169 ;  manufacturing, 
170  ;     influence     of    water    powers, 

170  ;    advantages    of    coast    cities, 

171  ;  advantages  of  nearness  to 
minerals,  172  ;  efiect  of  water  sup- 
ply>  173  ;  effect  of  parks,  173  ; 
not  units  of  political  life,  174  ;  effect 
of  State  control,  174  ;  tend  to  drain 
the  country,  175  ;  capitals,  176  ;  in- 
fluence of  railroads  on,  177  ;  influence 
of  colonization,  179;  illustrations  of 
causes  of  growth,  179-182;  number, 
182  ;  size,  183  ;  average  size,  183  ; 
geographical  distribution,  184  ;  per- 
centage of  urban  population,  185  ; 
comparative  growth  of  great  cities, 
186-188  ;  stationary,  189  ;  unfavor- 
able effect  of  rapid  growth,  189  ; 
sources  of  population,   igo  ;   foreign 


COM 

population,  190-193  :  negro  popu- 
lation, 193  ;  immigrants  from  other 
parts  of  the  United  States,  194,  195  ; 
effect  of  this  influence,  195  ;  many 
dominated  by  foreigners,  196  ;  dis- 
tribution by  ages,  197;  effect  of  im- 
migration, 198  ;  excess  of  women, 
199  ;  effect  in  education,  200  ;  negro 
quarters,  200 ;  future  of  cities,  201  ; 
tables  illustrating,  202-205. 
Citizenship,  a  qualification  for  suffrage, 

Civil  -Service,  number  of  government 
servants,  82  ;  expense  of.  93. 

Civil  Service  Commission,  work  of,  88  ; 
examinations  under,  94  ;  respected, 

.97- 

Civil  Service  Reform,  discussion  of, 
81-97  ;  prospects  for  the  future,  96. 

Civil  Service  Reform  Act  of  1883,  83. 

Civil  War,  strengthens  Congress,  12  ; 
effect  on  cities,  183. 

Clay,  Henry,  part  in  debate,  15. 

Cleveland,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  foreign 
population  in,  191-193. 

Cleveland,  many  bills  presented  to, 
5,  6  ;  elected  Governor,  51  ;  speeches 
during  campaign,  60;  a  minority 
President,  74;  on  the  Bering  Sea, 
129;  on  River  and  Harbor  Bills, 
231. 

Coal,  effect  of  cheap,  167-169. 

Colfax,  Speaker,  made  Vice-President, 

12. 

Colleges,  agricultural,  245. 

Colonies,  compulsory  voting  in,  40-44  ; 
town  meeting  in,  133-146  ;  influence 
of  office-holders,  143  ;  choice  of  town 
officers,  145  ;  the  shire  in,  147,  i6i ; 
unsuccessful  city  planters,  179. 

Columbian  Exposition,  182. 

Columbus,  foundation  of,  176. 

Commerce,  House  Committee,  209  ; 
Senate  Committee,  218. 

Committee,  on  Rules,  16  ;  discussion 
in,  207  ;  on  Appropriations,  209  ;  on 
Commerce,  209  ;  of  the  Whole,  215. 

Committee  system,  advantages  of,  8. 

Committees,  chairmen  of,  7  ;  strife  be- 
tween, 8  ;  relations  with  Cabinet 
ministers.  9  ;  bills  strangled  by,  9  ; 
arrange  details,  9  ;  at  first  chosen 
by  ballot,  10  ;  appointed  by  the 
Speaker,  10  ;  in  colonial  town  meet- 
ing, 141  ;  in  town  affairs,  145  :  on 
Rivers  and  Harbors,  209  ;  strife  for 
the  floor,  214,  215 

Committees  of  the  House,  early  stand- 
ing committees,  6  ;  increasing,  7. 


302 


flnDej. 


COM 

Commons,  English  House  of,  leader- 
ship in,  2  ;  vote  of  want  of  confidence 
iu,  3. 

Compulsory  voting,  suggestion  of,  21, 
22  ;  probable  effect,  22  ;  false  princi- 
ple of,  39  ;  colonial  instances,  40-44  ; 
penalty  of  jury  duty,  46. 

Confederacy,  Southern.  See  Southern 
Confederacy. 

Confederation,  committee  system  in, 
6  ;  land  policy,  236. 

Conference  Committee,  in  Congress, 
218-222  ;  report,  221. 

Congress,  no  power  over  President,  4  ; 
subject  to  public  opinion,  21 ,  circu- 
lation of  books  by,  61  ;  not  permitted 
to  elect  President,  72  ;  elections  to, 
78 ;  influence  on  appointments,  84  ; 
public  spirit  of  members,  85  ;  attitude 
'to  civil  service  reform,  86;  rapid 
changes  in,  91  ;  Pan-American,  104; 
quarrel  with  Balmaceda,  106  :  of 
Chile,  takes  Santiago,  iii  ;  political 
forces  in,  206 ;  records  of,  207  ;  ap- 
propriation bills,  208  ;  committee  of, 
209  :  relations  with  departments,  210; 
interest  of  members,  211  ;  filibuster- 
ing, 216  ;  practice  on  appropriations, 
218  ;  conference,  219  ;  interference 
with  administration,  229  ;  neglect  of 
land  question,  253. 

Congressional  system  of  government, 
3-10. 

Congressionalist  refugees,  117. 

Connecticut,  educational  qualification, 
29  ;  vote  in,  35  :  change  in  legisla- 
ture, 90;  reservation,  237  ;  land  ces- 
sion, 237  ;  sources  of  population,  287. 

Connecticut   River,  water  powers   on, 

Constantinople,  choice  of  site.  165. 

Continental  Congress,  committee  sys- 
tem in,  6. 

Corn  crop,  264. 

Cotton,  crop,  264  ;  factories,  272  ;  taxes 
paid  in,  274  ;  was  it  profitable?  296. 

Counties,  officers  in,  147  ;  types  of  gov- 
ernment, 147,  150:  prototype  in 
England,  148  ;  Virginia  shires,  148  ; 
local  subdivisions,  148  ;  assembly 
in,  149;  conditions  of  colonial  coun- 
ties, 149 ;  Virginia,  compared  with 
New  England,  150  ;  experiments  in 
Virginia,  150;  New  England  type, 
150  ;  New  York  type,  151  ;  Pennsyl- 
vania type,  151  ;  Virginia  type,  151  ; 
number,  152  ;  controlled  by  colonial 
authorities,  153;  few  elective  officers, 
153  ;  choice  of  members  of  assemblies. 


EGA 

154  ;  supervisors,  154  ;  suggestion  in 
Massachusetts,  155  ;  officers,  155  ; 
commissioners,  156  ;  Court  of  Ses- 
sions, 156  ;  County  Court,  156  ;  mem- 
bers of  County  Court,  156  ;  appoint- 
ment of,  157  ;  powers  of  County 
Court,  158  ;  County  Courts  in  New 
England,    159  ;    judicial    functions, 

155  ;  administrative  functions,  159  ; 
legislative  functions,  159  ;  effect  on 
the  Revolution.  160  ;  piesent  status, 
160  ;  location  of  county  seats,  177. 

Court,  County.     See  Counties. 
Criminals,  excluded  from  the  suffrage, 

28. 
Critics,  political,  service  of,  20. 
Cuba,  designs  on,  104. 
Cumberland,  causes  of  growth,  172. 
Cumberland  Road,  construction,  247. 
Curtis,  George  William,  on  civil  service 

reform,  81. 

DAVIS,  JEFFERSON,  expects 
success,  259  :  has  made  a  nation, 

260  :  on  negro  troops,  281  ;    military 

ability,  281  ;  disliked  Johnston,  284  ; 

strictures  by  Pollard,    285  ;    vetoes, 

286. 
Declaration  of  Intention,  suflrage  un- 
der, 26. 
Delaware,   property  qualification,  28  ; 

a  Slave  State,  271. 
Departments  of  national  government, 

civil  service  in,  84. 
Desert  lands,  251. 

Detroit,  foreign  population  in,  191,  1-92. 
Dill,    George,    fined    by    the    County 

Court,  158. 
Dogs,  legislation  in  Ipswich,  144. 
Domain,  public.     See  Public  Lands. 
"  Donations"  of  public  lands,  243. 
Duluth,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  at  head  of 

navigation,  179 ;  foreign  population, 

in,  191. 
Dunkirk,  city,  178. 

EASTERN  SHORE,  of  Virginia, 
147. 

Education,  reservation  of  lands,  245  ; 
land  grants,  inefficacy  of,  246  ;  in 
the  South,  288. 

Egan,  Patrick,  character  of,  107  ;  ap- 
pointed minister  to  Chile,  108  ;  sym- 
pathy with  Balmaceda,  109  ;  action 
on  cable  controversy,  in  ;  relation 
to  Balmaceda,  113  :  question  of  the 
refugees,  117;  coolness  of,  117;  re- 
fuses to  dismiss  refugees,  118  :  dis- 
courteous  despatch,    119;     Malta's 


IFnDcj. 


303 


ELE 

attack  on,  122  ;  renewed  controversy 
\Vth  Matta,  123  ;  withdrawal  asked, 
125  ;  withdrawal  refused,  125 ;  re- 
quest for  recall  withdrawn,  127  ; 
controlled  from  Washington,  130. 

Election  of  President,  details  by  State 
legislature,  65  :  day  of  election,  65  ; 
decision  of  contests,  70  ;  of  1788,  75  ; 
of  1820,  76  ;  of  1824,  77 ;  of  1844, 
74-75  ;  of  1848,  74 ;  of  1856,   74  ;  of 

■  i860,  74-77  ;  of  1864,  76  ;  of  1872, 
76  ;  of  1876,  75  ;  of  1880,  74-77,  79  ; 
of  1884,  74-76;  of  1888,  74;  of  1892, 

74-75,  77- 

Elections,  control  of  by  Congress,  65  ; 
control  of  by  States,  65. 

Elections  in  town  meeting;,  137,  145. 

Electoral  Colleges,  the,  67. 

Electoral  Commission  of  1876,  71. 

Electors,  for  President,  66 ;  always 
pledged,  67  ;  vote  as  directed,  69. 

Engineers.     See  War,  Secretary  of. 

England,  Parliamentary  system,  1-3 ; 
American  ministers  to,  108  ;  relations 
with  Chile,  108  ;  diplomacy  in,  128  ; 
unpopularity  of,  130  ;  county  gov- 
ernment in,  148-152;  definition  of  a 
city  in,  163  ;  interest  in  Civil  War, 
261. 

English,  immigrants  to  United  States, 
192  ;  in  New  York,  199  ;  in  cities, 
204. 

Erie  Canal,  168  ;  western  terminus, 
181. 

Evans,  Commander,  quarrel  with  Chil- 
ean minister,  113 ;  not  disavowed, 
127. 

Examinations,  as  tests  for  candidates. 
See  Appointment,  Civil  Service  Re- 
form, Removal. 

Exclusions  from  suffrage,  non-natural- 
ized persons,  26  ;  paupers,  28  ;  tax 
qualification,  28. 

Expenditures.     See  Appropriations. 

FALL    RIVER,   growth    of.     171  ; 
foreign  population  in,  191. 
Faneuil  Hall,  place  of  town  meetings, 

.1.38- 
Filibustering  in  Congress,  216. 
Finances,    importance  in     New   York 

City,  179. 
Florida,    property    qualification,    28  ; 

internal  improvements  in,  228  ;  area, 

235  ;  private  land  claims,  238. 
Force  Bill,  an  election  act,  65. 
Fortification,  lack  of  in  United  States. 

165. 
Port  Sumter,  fired  on,  263,  293. 


HAY 

Fo.\  River,  improvement  of,  227. 

France,  President  controlled  by  legis- 
lature. 73  ;  frontier  controversy  with 
Germany,  98  ;  warned  to  leave  Mex- 
ico, 104  ;   interest  in  Civil  War,  261. 

Fraud,  in  elections,  61-75  i  effect  of 
pure  civil  service  on,  95. 

Freemen,  (jf  the  colony,  136. 

French,  in  American  cities,  192. 

Frelinghuysen,  Secretary,  attitude  on 
Peruvian  question,  105. 

GARFIELD,  JAMES  A.,  a  minor- 
ity President,  74  ;  effect  of  Morey 
forgery,  79  ;  action  toward  Chile, 
105. 

Georgia,  compulsory  voting  in,  42  ; 
land  cession  of,  236. 

Germans,  enjoy  naturalization,  25  ;  in 
American  cities,  192,  204  ;  in  New 
York,  198. 

Germany,  interest  in  elections,  30  ; 
militia  service  m.  38  ;  frontier  con- 
troversy with  France,  98  ;  the  "  war- 
lord "  of,  lOI. 

Gladstone,  on  Jefferson  Davis,  260. 

Graduated  lands,  240. 

Grant,  U.  S.,  large  popular  majority, 
74  ;  campaign  against  Lee,  262. 

Greeley,  Horace,  in  presidential  elec- 
tion of  1872,  69. 

Green  River,  improvements,  218,  220. 

HAMILTON,  ALEXANDER,  eli- 
gible for  presidency,  68  ;  out- 
wits Jefferson,  176. 

Hancock,  John,  moderator  iti  Boston, 
139  ;   demagoguism,  143. 

Harbors,  advantage  of,  167-169  ;  in 
Civil  War.  265  :  legislation  on.  See 
River  and  Harbor  Bill. 

Harrisburg,  foundation  of,  176. 

Harrison,  Benjamin,  a  minority  Presi- 
dent, 74  ;  on  civil  service  reform,  81  ; 
message  on  Chilean  affairs,  99  ;  on 
the  neutrality  of  the  United  States 
toward  Chile,  109  ;  message  irritates 
Matta,  121  ;  Matta's  attack  on,  122  ; 
on  the  Baltimore  investigation,  123; 
on  the  Chilean  controversy,  123  ;  bel- 
ligerent message  on  Chile,  126;  in- 
fluence on  Chilean  dispute,  127  ;  un- 
necessarily humiliates  Chile,  130. 

Harrison,  William  Henry,  speeches 
during  campaign.  60. 

Harvard,  Jefferson's  complaint,  289. 

Hayes,  President,  bills  presented  to, 
6  ;  not  renominated,  59  ;  a  minority 
President,  74. 


304 


UnDcj. 


HEN 

Hennepin  Canal,  218,  220,  229. 

Hill,  David  B.,  suggestion  of  compul- 
sory voting,  21. 

Hoar,  George  F.,  on  River  and  Har- 
bor Bills.  2^2. 

Holland,  achieves  independence,  261. 

Holmes,  Mister,  makes  Mister  Jones 
swear,  158. 

Holyoke,  foreign  population  in,  191. 

Homestead  System,  240-244 ;  restric- 
tion, 252. 

House  of  Commons,  system  of  leader- 
ship, 2. 

House  of  Representatives,  Speaker  of, 
I ;  number  of  members,  5  ;  commit- 
tees in,  6-7  ;  struggle  for  the  floor,  8  ; 
election  to  in  Virginia,  44  ;  power  in 
presidential  elections,  70 ;  elections 
to,  78-79  ;  legislative  influence,  207  ; 
River  and  Harbor  Committee,  209  ; 
appropriation  bills  in,  213  ;  strife  of 
committees,  214  ;  filibustering,  216; 
previous  question,  217;  conference 
committees,  219  ;  yields  to  Senate 
on  appropriations,  222. 

Hiuigarians  in  cities,  193. 

Hurlburt,  minister  to  Peru,   105. 

ILLINOIS,  delinquent  voters  made 
jurors,  46  ;  disturbance  of  par- 
ties, 77  ;  counties  of,  152  ;  land 
grant  to,  248 ;  illiterate  persons 
excluded  from  the  suffrage,  29. 

Immigration,  places  of  landing,  171  ; 
in  cities,  190-193  ;  to  the  South, 
296. 

Indiana,  large  proportion  of  naturaliza- 
tions, 25  importance  in  presiden- 
tial elections,  63  :  an  October  State, 
66  :  State  capital  of.  177. 

Indianapolis,  causes  of  growth,  177. 

Indians,  defence  against,  158 :  right 
of  occupancy,  238  ;  money  payment 
to.  242  :  reservations,  250. 

Indian  Territory,  land  in,  236. 

Insane  persons  excluded  from  the 
suffrage,  28. 

Internal  improvements,  gifts  to  States, 
245,  247,  248  :  gifts  to  corporations, 
248  ;  table  of  grants,  256. 

Iowa,  vote  in,  48  :  permanence  of  par- 
ties in,  77  ;  internal  improvements 
in,  228. 

Ipswich,  legislation  against  dogs,  144  ; 
vote  on  rights  of  the  Colonies,  146. 

Iquique,  cable  cut  at,  in. 

Irish,  enjoy  naturalization,  25  ;  in 
American  cities,  192  ;  in  New  York, 
198  ;  in  cities,  204. 


LEG 

Italians,  in  cities,  193. 
Itata,  steamer,  pursuit  of,   no  ;  effect 
of,  116. 

JACKSON,  effect  on  civil  service, 
90;   military  ability,  291. 

Jefferson,  election  of,  67-71  ;  out- 
witted by  Hamilton,  176  ;  on  public 
lands,  241. 

Jeflerson  City,  foundation  of,  176. 

Jenckes,  Mr.,  urges  civil  service  re- 
form, 82. 

Jersey  City,  adjunct  of  New  York,  180. 

Jerusalem,  choice  of  site.   165. 

Johnson,  R.  M.,  chosen  Vice-Presi- 
dent by  Senate,  72 

Johnston,  Albert  Sidney,  resigns,  291. 

Johnston,  Joe,  disliked  by  Davis, 
284. 

Johnston,  William,  refuses  to  sit  in 
Comity  Court,  157. 

Jones  County,  Miss.,  287. 

Judiciary,  elective  in  .States,  go. 

Jury  Duty,  as  penalty  for  not  voting, 
46. 

KANSAS,  disturbance   of   parties, 
77  ;  county  seats  in,  177. 
Kansas  Citj',  growth  of,  i6g,  188. 
Kentucky,   counties  of,   160  ;  a   Slave 

State,  271. 
Knights  of  the  Shire,  in  E.igland,  149. 
Kno,\',  General,  speaks  in  the  Senate, 
4- 

LABOR  CANDIDATES,  77- 
Lafayette,  gift  of  land  to,  243. 

Lancaster,  Mass.,  compulsory  voting 
in,  40-41  ;  penalty  for  failing  to 
vote,  52  ;  excludes  William  Lincoln, 
137  ;  vote  on  the  road,  139  ;  quarrel 
over  meeting-house  site,  142. 

Land,  gifts  of,  244  ;  value  of  in  1861, 
271-273. 

Lands.     See  Public  Lands. 

Latin  America,  l^ee  Chile,  Mexico, 
Pan-American  Congress. 

Latin  Anieiicans,  achieve  indepen- 
dence, 261. 

Latin  races,  in  cities,  204. 

J^awrence,  a  manufacturing  city,  170. 

Leadville,  causes  of  growth,  173. 

Lee,  yields  to  Grant,  262  ;  on  negro 
troops,  281  ;  command  by,  284  ; 
confidence  of  his  army.  291. 

Legislatures,  appointment  of  presiden- 
tial electors,  62  ;  elections  of,  78  ; 
rapid  change  in,  90  ;  colonial,  choice 


ITuDcj. 


305 


LEN 

of  members,  145  ;  choice  of  non-res- 
idents, 145. 

Lenox,  country  life,  175. 

Lima,  causes  of  growth,  172. 

Lincoln,  Abraham,  a  minority  Presi- 
dent, 74  ;  influence  in  Civil  War, 
338,  259  :  vetoes,  286. 

Lincoln,  William,  excluded  by  Lan- 
caster, 137. 

Loans  in  Civil  War,  273,  274. 

Lobby,  effect  of,  207  ;  no  River  and 
Harbor.  211. 

Lombards,  system  of  fines,  45. 

London,  choice  of  site,  165. 

Louisiana,  boundary  of,  235  :  private 
land  claims,  238  ;  aids  Confederacy, 
276. 

Louisville,  choice  of  site,  166. 

Lowe,  gift  of  land  to,  243. 

Lowell,  Charles  Russell,  a  cavalry 
commander,  292. 

Lowell,  James  Russell,  as  minister  to 
England,  108. 

Lyne,  William,  begs  a  commission,  157. 

Lynn,  a  manufacturing  city,  170. 

TV/TANCHESTER-BY-THE-  SEA, 

Manchester,  N.  H.,  water  power  at, 
171  ;  foreign  population  in,  191. 

Manning,  Secretary,  on  the  Bering 
Sea,  129. 

Manufactures,  in  cities,  170  ;  in  1861, 
272. 

Marietta,  slow  growth,  179. 

Maryland,  compulsory  voting  in,  41  ; 
failure  of  an  elector  to  attend,  67  ; 
local  government  in,  150 ;  county 
government  in,  150 ,  election  to  co- 
lonial assembly,  154;  counties  in  the 
Revolution,  160  ;  a  Slave  State,  271  ; 
sources  of  population,  287. 

Massachusetts,  voters  in,  23  ;  natural- 
ization in,  26 ;  exclusions  from  suf- 
frage, 27  :  pa\ipers  excluded,  28  ; 
educational  qualification,  29  ;  vote 
in,  35  ;  compulsory  voting  in  not  re- 
quired, 42  ;  poll  tax  requisite  abol- 
ished, 49  ;  vote  tabulated,  54  :  Mug- 
wumps in,  76  ;  permanence  of  parties 
in,  77  ;  summoning  town  meetings, 
135;  conditions  of  settlement,  134: 
colonial  town  meeting  in,  135  ;  read- 
ing of  laws  .against  immorality,  139  ; 
influence  of  colonial  office-holders, 
143  ;  choice  of  non-residents,  145  ; 
proposition  for  County  Councils,  155  ; 
County  Commissions  in,  159;  co- 
lonial county  government,  147,    150, 


MIS 

152,  160  ;  conditions  of  local  gov- 
ernment, 149,  150  ;  type  of  county 
government,  151  ;  appointment  of 
county  officer.s,  152-157;  control  of 
county  officers,  153;  county  as- 
semblies, 154  :  first  legislative  as- 
sembly, 156;  development  of  county 
court,  158  ;  legislative  powers  in 
counties,  159 ;  effect  on  the  Revolu- 
tion, 160 ;  controversy  with  Berk- 
shire County,  160  ;  land  cession,  237  ; 
sources  of  population,  287. 

Matta,  .Senor,  Chilean  minister  of 
foreign  affairs,  115;  discourteous 
despatches,  1 19  :  circular  to  the  am- 
bassadors, 121  ;  renewed  controversy 
with  Egan,  123  :  circular  issued  by 
Montt.  124  ;  circular  withdrawn, 
125  ;  additional  apology  asked,  125  ; 
note  withdrawn,  127  ;  note  made 
public,  128. 

Merrimac  River,  water  powers  on, 
170. 

Mexican  War,  territorial  results,  235  ; 
land  bounties,  243  ;  sources  of  troops, 
290. 

Mexico,  occupied  by  France,  104  ;  re- 
sentment toward  United  States,  130. 

Michigan,  appointment  of  electors  in 
1890,  62  ;  county  government  in,  147- 
151  ;  feeds  New  York,  i6g. 

Michigan,  Lake,  navigation  of,  i6g. 

Milford,  Mass.,  population,  189. 

Militia  service,  legal  basis  of,  38. 

Milwaukee,  choice  of  site,  i56;  foreign 
population  in,  191.  192. 

Ministers'  influence  in  town  meeting, 
144. 

Minneapolis,  growth  of,  169 ;  a  manu- 
facturing city,  170  ;  growth  of,  188  ; 
foreign  population  in,  191,  192. 

Minnesota,  vote  in  i8go,  35:  perma- 
nence of  parties  in,  77  ;  feeds  New 
York,  i6g. 

Mississippi,  educational  qualification, 
29  ;  rate  of  voting  in,  32  :  cities  in, 
184  ;  land  grant  to,  248  ;  Jones 
County  episode,  287. 

Mississippi  River,  navigation  of,  169  ; 
Upper  Valley,  181  ;  decay  of  navi- 
gation, 187  ;  appropriation  for  im- 
provement, 218  ;  special  commission, 
223,  231  ;  in  .Southern  Confederacy, 
266  ;  crossed  by  Confederates,  276. 

Missouri,  a  Slave  State,  269,  271  ; 
does  not  secede,  270. 

Missouri  River,  decay  of  navigation, 
187  ;  improvement  of,  227  ;  commis- 
sion on,  231  ;  blocked,  271. 


20 


3o6 


HiiDcj. 


MOD 

Moderator,  the  Speakers  province,  lO. 

Monroe,  uncontested  election,  58. 

Monroe  Doctrine,  announcement  of, 
104. 

Montgomery,  excess  of  negroes,  194. 

Montt,  Chilean  minister  to  Washing- 
ton, apology  by,  124. 

Mountains,  in  Civil  War,  265. 

Municipal  elections,  34. 

Municipal  government,  effect  of  State 
interference,  40 ;  problems  of,  162  ; 
bibliography  of.  162. 


NATIONAL    COMMITTEE,    in 
campaigns,  60. 

National  Conventions,  described,  59  ; 
in  case  of  death  of  candidate,  70. 

Naturalization,  proportion  of  aliens 
naturalized,  25;  admits  to  the  suf- 
frage, 64. 

Navy,  blockaded  by,  277. 

Nebraska,  county  government  in,  151. 

Negroes,  scanty  vote  in  the  South,  32  ; 
effect  on  the  vote,  34  ;  effect  of  com- 
pulsory voting  on,  50  ;  prevented 
from  voting,  75;  in  cities,  193,  194, 
200 :  vote  of,  194  ;  number  in  the 
South,  292  ;  aid  to  the  South,  294  ; 
aid  to  the  North,  295. 

Nevada,  influence  in  presidential  elec- 
tions, 74. 

New  ]?edford,  cause  of  growth,  171. 

Newburyport,  site  of,  166  ;  population, 
189. 

New  England,  vote  tabulated,  55 ; 
town  meeting  in  {sre  Colonial  Town 
Meeting)  ;  social  conditions,  134  ; 
county  subordinated  to  the  town, 
150;  cities  in,  164;  effect  of  moun- 
tains on,  167  ;  fuel  in,  171  :  commer- 
cial centre  is  Boston,  180;  distribu- 
tion of  cities,  184  ;  population  in, 
1790,  186:  manufacturing  towns, 
189  ;  foreign  population  in,  191  ; 
movement  from  hill  farms,  195  ; 
population,  268. 

New  Jersey,  rate  of  voting  in,  32  ;  co- 
lonial county  government,  151 ;  har- 
bors in,  167  ;  cities  in,  184  ;  sources 
of  population,  2S7. 

New  Mexico,  title  to,  235  ;  private  land 
claims,  238. 

New  Orleans,  choice  of  site,  166 ; 
growth  of,  169  ;  decay  of  river  trade, 
187  ;  foreigners  in,  193  ;  negroes  in, 
193  ;  origin  of  urban  population,  203; 


NOV 

derivation  of  foreigners,  204 ;   capt- 
ured, 267  ;    foreign  population,  269. 

Newport,  country  life,  175. 

New  York  City,  largest  proportion  of 
alien  voters,  27  ;  registration  in,  31 ; 
proportion  of  voters.  33  ;  difficulty  of 
voting  in,  33  ;  vote  in,  35,  36  ;  vote  in 
municipal  elections,  36;  registration 
in,  50  ;  vote  tabulated,  54  ;  "deals" 
in,  66  :  Board  of  Electrical  Control, 
92  ;  political  officers,  92  ;  Tammany 
county  government,  147  ;  choice  of 
site,  166,  167  ;  attracts  steamer  trade, 
167;  effect  of  the  Erie  Canal,  i£8  ; 
depends  on  the  West  for  food,  169 ; 
the  metropolis,  170;  manufactures 
in,  170  ;  port  for  immigrants,  171  ; 
effect  of  foreign  trade,  172  ;  sugges- 
tion to  make  a  separate  .State,  174; 
governed  from  Albany,  175  ;  rail- 
roads late,  178  ;  reasons  for  growth, 
179  ;  means  of  defence,  180  :  growth 
by  decades,  185  ;  strain  on  popular 
government,  1S9  ;  proportion  of  for- 
eigners, 191  ;  number  of  foreigners, 
192  :  Germans,  192  ;  Irish,  192 ; 
Russians,  193  ;  number  of  adult 
foreigners,  196  ;  foreigners,  propor- 
tionately, 198  ;  excess  of  women,  igg; 
colored  quarters  in,  200 ;  origin  of 
urban  population,  203  ;  derivation  of 
foreign  population,  204  ;  foreign  pop- 
ulation in,  204:  improvement  of  har- 
bor, 223. 

New  York  State,  vote  tabulated,  54  ; 
importance  in  presidential  elections, 
63  ;  influence  in  presidential  elec- 
tions, 74  ;  no  vote  in  1788,  75  ;  effect 
of  Mugwumps  in,  76  ;  colonial  coun- 
ty government,  151-159;  constructs 
a  canal,  168  ;  cities  in,  184  ;  internal 
improvements  in,  228  ;  land  cession, 

237- 

Nitrate,  deposits  in  Chile,  103. 

Nomination  for  President,  renomina- 
tion,  58  :  National  Convention,  59  ; 
platform.  58. 

Norfolk,  site  of,  167. 

North.     Sen  United  .States. 

North  Carolina,  colonial  county  govern- 
ment, 151  ;  action  of  Mecklenburg 
County,  160  ;  water  powers  in.  171  ; 
effect  on  the  National  Capital,  176  ; 
land  cession,  237  ;  reservation,  237  ; 
Union  troops,  270. 

Northern  Pacific  Railroad, Yellowstone 
Branch,   178. 

Northwest  Ordinance,  reported,  6. 

Nova  Scotia,  harbors,  167. 


ffuDej. 


307 


OCT 
/^CTOBER    STATES,    effect    of. 

Office-holding.  Sre  Appointments,  Re- 
movals, Civil  Service. 

Ohio,  an  October  State,  66  ;  feeds  New 
York,  169  ;  coal  shipments,  181  ;  five 
percent,  fund,  247. 

Ohio  River,  in  Ci\Tl  War,  266. 

"One  Hundred  Proprietors"  of  Provi- 
dence, 136. 

Orders  in  Council,  force  of,  2. 

Oregon,  internal  improvements  in,  228, 
230  ;  claim  to,  239. 

Oswego,  population,  1S9. 

Otis,James,  moderator  in  Boston,  139. 

Oxford  University,  government  of,  38. 


PACIFIC  RAILROAD,  land  grant 
to,  248. 
Pan-American  Congress,  104. 
Parks,  effect  of,  173. 
Parliament,  system  of  leadership,    2  ; 

county   members,   149. 
Parliamentary  Procedure,    in  general    ; 

{s^e  Congress,  House  of  Rcpresenta-    ■ 

tives.    Senate) ;  in    town    meetings. 

140.  ! 

Parliamentary  System,  description  of,    , 

1-3- 

Parties,  stability  of.  in  the  United 
States,  17  ;  effect  of  compulsory 
voting,  51  :  permanence  in  .States, 
76  ;  effect  of  third  parties,  77  ;  effect 
on  civil  service  reform,  86  ;  as  a  . 
popular  gain,  95.  ! 

Party   divisions   between   two  houses, 

79-        .  .  ' 

Patagonia,  secured  by  Chile,  102.  j 

Paterson,  foreign  population  in,  igi. 

Pattison,  elected  Governor  of  Penn- 
sylvania, 51. 

Pendleton,  George  H.,  Civil  -Service 
Reform  Act,  83. 

Pennsylvania,  vote  in  iSgo,  35,  36 ;  co- 
lonial county  government,  151  ; 
powers  of  county  officers,  154  ;  type 
of  county  government,  159  ;  coal, 
lake  shipments,  i8i;  cities  in,  184  ; 
internal  improvements  in.  22S  ;  land 
cession  of,  236. 

People  of  the  United  States,  attitude 
toward    civil   service    reform,   81-97. 

Pereira,  115;  change  of  tone  by,  124; 
apology  by,  127. 

Peru,  dispute  with  Chile,   102. 

Phelps,  E.  J.,  as  minister  to  England, 
108. 

Philadelphia,  choice  of  site,    166;  in- 


PRE 

terest  in  canals,  16S  ;  reasons  for 
growth,  16S  ;  dependent  on  the 
West.  169  ;  manufacturing  in,  170  ; 
coal,  171  ;  immigrants  nito,  172  ;  bad 
water,  173;  early  railroad,  178; 
growth  by  decades,  186  ;  foreigners 
in,  191;  native  white  population, 
193  ;  origin  of  urban  populatiun,  203; 
derivation  of  foreign  population, 
204  ;  improvement  of  harbor,  226. 

Pierce,  Franklin,  not  renominated,  59. 

Pigeon,  John,  .a  ballot-stuffer,  142. 

Pithole,  causes  of  growth,  173. 

Pittsburg,  cause  of  growth,  171,  172. 

Platforms,  political.  59. 

Plymouth,  compulsory  voting  in,  42. 

Poles,  in  cities,  193. 

Political  campaigns,  preliminaries,  58  ; 
nominations  for  President,  59  ;  di- 
rection, of,  60 ;  use  of  money  in, 
60;  military  organizations,  61. 

Polk,  James  K.,  not  renominated,  58  ; 
fraud  in  the  election,  75. 

Pollard,  opposition  to  Davis.  2S2,  285. 

Popular  vote,  for  President  not  in- 
tended, 73. 

Population,  compared  with  voters, 
54-57  ;  of  the  United  States,  87  ; 
urban,  163-185  ;  in  large  and  small 
cities,  183 ;  of  large  cities,  185-188  ; 
of  stationary  towns,  188  ;  propor- 
tion of  foreigners  in  cities,  190-193  ; 
negroes  in  cities,  193 ;  movement 
from  the  country  to  the  city,  194- 
196  ;  distribution  by  ages,  196  ;  ef- 
fect of  immigration,  198  ;  excess  of 
women,   199. 

Port.age  Lake,  improvement,  218,  220. 

Posse  Comitatus,  service  in,  38. 

Postmasters,  choice  of,  88. 

Pre-emption,  land  system,  240  ;  re- 
striction, 252. 

Premier,  the  Speaker  as,  1-19 ;  com- 
pared with  the  Speaker,  17,  18. 

President,  executive  duties,  3  ;  no 
power  over  Congress,  4  ;  unifies  ad- 
ministration, 4  ;  likely  to  stand  by 
the  Speaker,  18  ;  less  powerful  than 
the  Speaker,  19  .  constitutional  quali- 
fications of,  68  ;  not  controlled  by 
Congress,  72  ;  application  of  civil 
service  reform,  82  ;  message  on 
Chile,  116;  tendency  to  negotiate 
in  public,  128  ;  should  unify  the 
cabinet,  129  ;  legislative  power,  206  ; 
on  River  and  Harbor  Bills,  231  ;  of 
Southern  Confederacy.  See  Davis, 
Jefferson. 

Presidential  election,    voters    entitled 


308 


UnDei*. 


PRE 

to  participate,  23-30  ;  vote  of  1888, 
34  ;  getting  out   the   vote,   36  ;  vote 
compared   with   population,    56-57  : 
account  of,    58,    80  ;  nomination   of 
President,  59  ;  management  of  cam- 
paign,     6c-6i  ;     voters  in,      61-62 ; 
suggested  reform  in  vote,  63  ;  total 
votes,  64;  the  electors.  66;  qualifi- 
cations  of  President,   68  ;  of   1836, 
72  ;  of    1840,    60 ;  of    1872,    6g :  of 
1876,   67  ;  of  1884,  60 ;  of  1888,  63- 
66;  of  1892,    59;  case    of  death  of 
candidate,  6g  ;  choice  by  the  House, 
71  ;  Act  of  1887,   71  ;  of  1880,   73  : 
minority   Presidents,    74  ;  effect   on 
reconstruction,    76  ;    regular   candi- 
dates,  77  ;  management  of,   79  ;  in- 
terest in,  79  :   returns,   80. 
Previous  question,  in  the  House,  217. 
Prime  Minister,  Knglish,  1-3. 
Princeton,  Jefferson's  complaint,  289. 
Proprietary,   m   colonial    towns.    136  ; 
passing  away,  142.   Set'  Town  Meet- 
ing. 
Providence,  town  meeting  in,  134-136, 
140  ;  influence  in  town  meeting,  143  ; 
choice  of  site,  166;  cause  of  growth, 
171. 
Public  domain.    See  Public  Lands. 
Public   lands,   poliiy    of    the    United 
States,  233-257  ;  e.vhaustion  of  ara- 
ble, 233  ;  acquirement,  234  ;  org.ini- 
zation  of  Territories,  236  ;  the  public 
domain,   236  ;    State   cessions,  237  ; 
reservations,  237;  area,  239;  policy  of 
disposition,  239-241  ;  proceeds,  241  ; 
minimum  price,  241  :  Indian  claim, 
242  ;    expenses  on,   241  ;    grants  to 
individuals,     243,    244 ;     grants     to 
States,    244-247  ;  grants   for  educa- 
tion,  245 ;    two,  three,  and  five  per 
cent,  funds.  247  ;  grants  for  internal 
improvements.     247-249  ;      railroad 
grants,  248  ;   Pacific  railroads,  248  ; 
reversions,  249  ;  summary,  249  ;  pres- 
ent  domain,    250 ;     Indian   reserva- 
tions, 250  ;  present  value,  251  ;   de- 
fects, 252  ;  large  estates,  252  ;  land- 
grabbers,     253  ;      responsibility     of 
Congress.  254  ;  total  of  acquisitions, 
255  ;  total  of  dispositions,  256,  257  ; 
during  Civil  War,  279. 
Puritan,  element,  in  colonies,  297. 


QUEBEC,  choice  of  site,  165. 
Quintero  Hay,  landing  of  Con- 
gressionalists  at.  iii  ;  effect  of,  116. 


ROT 

"P  ACINE,  a  city,  178. 
i\.    Railroads,  effect  on  city  building, 
177,  178;   New  York  Central,   178; 
Pennsylvania,  178;  Baltimore  &  Ohio, 
178  ;  all  trade  routes,  178  ;    to   Chi- 
cago,   179,    181  :  effect  on  Chicago, 
187  ;  effect  on  the  Northwest,  188  ; 
land  grants  for,  248  ;  reversions,  249  ; 
in  Civil  War,  270. 
Randall,  Samuel  J.,  a  powerful  chair- 
man, 7. 
Reagan,  Mr.,  Chairman  of  River  and 

Harbor  Committee,  210,  212.  221. 
Reconstruction,  effect   on  presidential 

election,  76. 
Reform  of  the  Civil  Service.    See  Civil 

Service  Reform. 
Registration,  legal  effect  of,  37  ;  effect 

on  voting,  49. 
Reiter,  Commander,  action  on  the  Bar- 

rundia  cases,  120. 
Reports  of  committees,  212,  218,  221. 
Residence,    qualification   for   the   suf- 
frage, 29. 
Revenue  of  the  United  States,  87._ 
Revolution,  influence  of  town  meetings, 

146. 
Rhode   Island,  property   qualification, 
28  ;  permanence   of  parties   in,  77  ; 
counties  in,  152. 
Richmond,  canal  to,  168  ;  passports  in, 

283. 
River  and  Harbor  Bill,significance,207; 
erratic  character,  207;  preparation  of, 
208  ;  estimates,  208,  209 ;  Committee 
on,  209  ;  committee  discussions,  210  ; 
bill  framed,  211;  amount,  212  ;  re- 
ported, 212  ;  reported  again,  213  ; 
debate,  213-215;  filibustering,  216, 
217;  passes  House,  217;  in  the 
Senate,  218  ;  Committee  of  Confer- 
ence, 219  ;  Conference  report,  220- 
222  ;  passes,  222  ;  provisions,  223  ; 
utility,  224  :  objectionable  items.  225- 
228  ;  lack  of  system,  228  ;  power  of 
War  Department.  229-231  ;  admin- 
istrative commissions,  231  ;  not 
signed  by  President,  231  ;  sum- 
mary, 232. 
Rivers,  navigation  of,  169. 
Rivers  and  Harbors,  legislation,  206- 

232. 
Rochester,  a  manufacturing  city,  170. 
Rome,  choice  of  site,  165. 
Roosevelt,   Theodore,     on     Tammany 

Latin,  126. 
Rotation   in   office.     See  Appointment, 
Removals,  Civil  Service  Reform.      , 


HuDcr, 


309 


RUG 

Rugby,  slow  growth,  179. 

Rules,  framed  by  each  Congress,  7  ; 
apphed  by  the  Speaker,  10  ;  Com- 
mittee on,  16;  do  not  confer  the 
Speaker's  power,  18. 

Rural  population.     See  Population. 

Russia,  Alaskan  cession,  235. 

Russians,  incities,  193. 


SALZBURG,  choice  of  site,  164. 
Samoa,  our  claims  to,  131. 

Sandy  Kay,  Harbor  of  Refuge,  212. 

San  Francisco,  United  States  ship,  ob- 
serves Congressionalists'  landing, 
III  ;  site  of.  167;  future  of,  187; 
foreign  population  in,  igi,  192  ; 
origin  of  urban  population,  203  ;  der- 
ivation of  foreigners,  204, 

Santiago,  captured  by  Congression- 
alists, 106. 

Saybrook,  site  of,  166. 

Scandinavians,  in  American  cities, 
192  ;  in  New  York,  198. 

Schools,  effect  of  city  growth,  200. 
See  Education. 

Schuylkill,  causes  of  growth,  173. 

Scotch,  in  cities,  204. 

Scranton,  causes  of  growth,  172. 

Secession,  connection  with  slavery, 
293. 

Secretary  of  State,  called  Premier,  i  ; 
a  subordinate,  3-4. 

Sedden,  Confederate  Secretary  of  War, 
2S2. 

Select  Committees.      See  Committees. 

Selectmen,  choice  of,  in  colonial  towns, 

145- 

Selma,  excess  of  negroes,  194. 

Senate,  number  of  members,  5  ;  com- 
mittees in,  7  ;  committees  chosen  by 
ballot,  ID  :  power  in  presidental  elec- 
tions, 70  ;  legislative  influence,  206  ; 
increases  appropriations,  218  -  220, 
222  ;  River  and  Harbor  Bill  in,  218  ; 
Conference  Committee,  220  ;  enroll- 
ment, 223. 

Senators,  elections  of,  78. 

Sewell,  Samuel,  moderator  in  Boston, 
139  ;  on  Boston  town  meeting,  140  ; 
declines  to  be  moderator,   142. 

Sex,  a  qualification  for  suffrage,  24. 

.Shenandoah  Valley,  in  Civil  War,  267. 

Sheridan,  a  cavalry  commander,  292. 

Sheriff,  in  colonial  counties.  See  Coun- 
ties. 

Sherman,  campaigns,  266  ;  March  to 
the  Sea,  276. 

Shire.    See  County. 


STA 

Silver  Coinage,  offset  against  Election 
Bill,  65. 

Slavery,  effect  on  the  South,  292-298. 

South,  exercise  of  the  suffrage  in,  32  ; 
election  methods  in,  33  ;  compared 
with  the  North,  258  -  298  ;  local 
government  in.  See  Counties,  and 
Colonies,  bj>  name. 

Southampton,  L.  I.,  compulsory  voting 
in,  40. 

South  Carolina,  type  of  colonial  county 
government,   150  ;   land  cession,  237. 

Southern  Confederacy,  reason  for  de- 
feat, 258  :  expectation  of  success, 
259  -  261  ;  foreign  relations,  261  ; 
military  successes,  262;  geographi- 
cal advantages,  263,  265  ;  resources, 
264  :  food,  265  ;  control  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi, 266  ;  wooded  country,  267  ; 
inside  lines,  267  ;  population,  268- 
271  ;  relations  of  Border  States,  271  ; 
wealth,  271  ;  manufactures,  272 ; 
capital,  273  ;  income,  274  ;  debt, 
274  ;  currency,  275  :  military  sup- 
plies, 275  ;  ettect  of  blockade,  277  ; 
internal  transportation.  277  ;  enlist- 
ments, 280  ;  aptitude  for  war,  281  ; 
e.xecutive,  282  :  lack  of  system,  283  ; 
commissariat,  283  ;  discipline,  284  ; 
centralization,  2S4  ;  internal  opposi- 
tion, 285  ;  quarrel  with  Georgia, 
286  :  war  with  Jones  County,  287  ; 
military  efficiency,  288  ;  illiteracy  of 
the  army,  289  ;  officers,  290  ;  troops, 
291  ;  cavalry,  292  ;  negroes,  293  ; 
immigration,  296  :  business  manage- 
ment, 296 ;  origin  of  population, 
297  ;  effect  of  slaverj',  298. 

Spain,  land  cessions  to  the  United 
States,  238  ;  resists  Napoleon,  261. 

Speaker,  of  the  House  of  Representa- 
tives, his  status,  i  :  as  Premier,  1-19  ; 
as  a  moderator,  in  the  Colonies,  as 
a  party  chieftain,  10  ;  gradual  in- 
crease of  powers,  10-17  •  control 
over  legislation,  11  ;  has  practically 
a  veto,  14  :  great  prestige  ;  head  of 
a  "  steering  committee,"  15  ;  his 
power  negative,  15  :  can  he  be  forced 
to  resign  ?  18  ;  powers  likely  to  in- 
crease, 19  ;  power  of  recognition,  22  ; 
legislative  influence,  206  ;  appoint- 
ment of  committees,  210;  signs  bills, 
223. 

Spotswood,  Governor,  proclamation  of, 

153- 

Standing  Committees.  See  Commit- 
tees. 

State  legislatures,  make  voters,  63. 


310 


irn&ej. 


STA 

States,  elections  in,  34  ;  vote  tabulated, 
55  ;  appointment  of  presidential  elec- 
tors, 62  ;  inHuence  in  presidential 
elections,  73  ;  eflfect  of  unit  vote,  77  ; 
executive  officers  elective,  90  ;  con- 
trol city  governments,  174  ;  founding 
of  cities  by,  176:  land  cessions,  236  ; 
reservations,  237  ;  public  lands  in, 
239  ;  grants  to,  244-247  ;  internal 
improvement  grants.  247,  248  ;  sale 
of  lands,  252  ;  land  grants  to.  256  ; 
Free  and  Slave-holding,  263-268  : 
Border,  in  Civil  War,  279. 

Stephens,  opposition  to  Davis,  282. 

St.  Louis,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  growth 
of,  169 ;  decay  of  river  trade,  187  ; 
foreign  popul.ition  in,  191,  192  ;  origin 
of  urban  population,  203  ;  derivation 
of  foreigners,  204  ;  foreign  popula- 
tion, 269. 

St.  Paul,  choice  of  site,  166  ;  growth 
of,  168,  169,  188  ;  foreign  population 
in,  191,192. 

Suffrage,  the  exercise  of,  20-57  ;  favor- 
ite subject  for  legislation,  21  ;  statis- 
tics of,  23-32  ;  exclusion  from,  non- 
naturalized,  26  ;  property  qualifica- 
tion, 28  ;  criminals,  28  ;  illiteracy, 
29  ;  insanity,  29  ;  disqualification 
from  residence,  29  :  actual  legal  vo- 
ters, 30  ;  deductions  for  the  ill  and 
absent,  31  ;  not  a  talisman,  39  ; 
exercise  of,  tables,  54-57  ;  voters  for 
President,  61  :  general  ticket  system, 
62  ;  in  presidential  elections,  con- 
ferred by  .States,  63  ;  property  qual- 
ification, 64  ;  tax  qualification,  64  ; 
educational  qualification,  64  :  of 
women,  64  ;  of  unnaturalized  aliens, 
64  ;  effect  of  extension,  90. 

Supreme  Court  of  Southern  Confed- 
eracy, 285, 

Swamp  land,  grants,  246. 

Switzerland,  President  chosen  by  Con- 
gress, 73. 

TAMMANY,  control  of  county  gov- 
ernment,    147  ;    does   not   exile, 

174. 
Tariff  of  1883,  220. 
Taxation,  the  condition  of  the  sufiirage, 

28  ;    legal    basis    of,    37  :    Federal, 

amount  of,  93. 
Taxes,  in  Civil  War,  273. 
Taylor,  Zachary,  a  minority  President, 

74- 
Tennessee,    vote    in,   48  ;    admission, 

236  ;  Union  troops,  270. 
Territories,  area,  236,  255. 


UNI 

Territory  of  United  States,  accessions, 
234- 

Texas,  vote  in,  48  ;  permanence  of 
parties  in,  76  ;  annexation  of,  104  ; 
area,  235 ;  State  lands,  252 ;  aids 
Confederacy,  276. 

Timber  culture,  244. 

Town  meeting,  in  the  Colonies,  133-146 ; 
summons,  135  ;  warrant,  135  ;  par- 
ticipants. 135;  "Proprietary,"  136; 
kinds  of,  136,  137 ;  voters  in,  136- 
138  ;  colonial,  town  clerk,  138  ;  busi- 
ness, 138  ;  moderator,  139  ;  debate, 
139;  length,  140  ;  procedure,  140; 
voting,  141  ;  ballot-stuffing,  141  ; 
minority  protests,  142  ;  indirect  in- 
fluences, 143  ;  minister  in,  144  ;  func- 
tions. 144  ;  political  functions,  145  ; 
choice  of  representatives,  146  ;  in- 
structions to  representatives,  146. 

Town  quarter  day,  in  Providence,  134, 
136,  138. 

Tracy,  does  not  disavow  Commander 
Evans,  113  ;   report  irritates  Matta, 

121. 

Troy,  choice  of  site.  166. 

Trumbull,  Ricardo  S.,  a  Chilean,  102  ; 

on  the  Chilean  situation,  115. 
Tweed,  a  Tammany  leader,  147. 

UNITED  STATES,  legislative  sys- 
tem in,  I  et  seg.  ;  suffrage  in, 
20  ei  st-g.  ;  population  in,  24  ; 
movement  of  population  in.  29  ;  par- 
ticipation of  voters  in,  32  ;  propoi> 
tion  of  voters  in.  33 ;  negative  form 
of  government  in,  37  ;  services  due 
to,  38;  party  allegiance  in,  51  ;  votes 
and  voters  in,  53-57  ;  vote  tabulated, 
55  ;  presidential  elections  in,  58  ei 
seg.  ;  variety  of  public  service,  87 ; 
population  of,  87  ;  revenue  of,  87  ; 
international  relations  of,  98-132  ; 
compared  with  Chile,  101-103 ;  in 
American  politics,  104  ;  appointment 
of  public  ministers,  108  ;  cities  in, 
162-205  •  public  land  policy,  233-257  ; 
reasons  for  success  in  Civil  War, 
258-298  ;  superiority  of  strength, 
259;  Southern  domination,  260  ;  mili- 
tary reverses,  262 :  geographical 
advantages,  264  ;  geographical  dis- 
advantages. 265 ;  railroads,  266  ; 
connection  between  East  and  West, 
267  ;  number  of  troops,  268 ;  popu- 
lation, 268,  269  ;  Border  States, 
270 ;  value  of  land,  271  ;  manufact- 
ures, 272  :  wealth,  273  ;  capital, 
273  ;   resources,    274  ;   plentj',    276  ; 


1[nC»ci% 


311 


URB 

blockade,  277  ;  surplus  of  strength, 

279  ;  internal  growth,  279  ;  imports, 

280  ;  enlistments,  280  ;  intelligence, 
289 ;  cavalry,  292  ;  aid  of  the  ne- 
groes, 29s  ;  origin  of  population, 
297.     See  Population  ;  see  Cities. 

Urban  population.     See  Population. 

VACANCIE.S,  in  presidential  elec- 
tors, 67. 

Valparaiso,  cable  from,  110  ;  effect  of 
attack  on  the  Haltimore,  115. 

Venice,  choice  of  site,  165. 

Vermont,  small  proportion  of  naturali- 
zations, 25  :  vote  in,  48  ;  perma- 
nence of  parties  in,  77. 

Vice-President,  qualifications  of,  68  ; 
election  of.     See  President. 

Vicksburg,  captured,  267. 

Viel,  telegram  to  Balmaceda,  112. 

Virginia,  compulsory  voting  in,  43  ; 
county  government  in,  147  ;  east- 
ern shore  of,  147  :  early  shires  in, 
148  ;  number  and  size  of  counties, 
152  ;  sheriffs  in,  155  ;  land  cession, 
237  ;  reservation,  237  ;  secedes, 
271  ;  sources  of  population.  287. 

Virginia  City,  causes  of  growth,  173. 

Voters  in  municipal  elections,  34  :  in 
State  elections,  34  ;  in  presidential 
elections,  56,  57  ;  in  colonial  town 
meeting,  135-13S. 

Votes,  tabulation  compared  with  popu- 
lation, 54-57  ;  in  presidential  elec- 
tions, 64  ;  effect  of  office  on,  95. 

Voting,  compulsory,  suggestion  of,  21, 


WAR,  defencelessness  of  cities,  165, 
180. 
War,  Civil.     See  The  United  States. 
War  of  1812,  land  bounties,  243. 
War,    Secretary  of,  river  and   harbor 
estimates,    208  ;    report,   209 ;    rela- 


VEL 

tions  with  committees,  210  ;  discre- 
tion, 216  ;  criticises  River  and  Har- 
bor Bill,  226  ;  discretion,  229  ;  criti- 
cism of,  230. 

Warrant.     ^SV^  Town  Meeting. 

Washington,  city  of,  public  service  in, 
87  ;  Capitol  designed  by  a  physician, 
91  ;  canal  to,  168  ;  park  system,  174; 
causes  of  growth,  176  ;  foreign  pop- 
ulation in,  191  ;  immigration  from 
other  parts  of  United  States,  195. 

Washington,  President,  in  the  Senate, 
4  ;  few  bills  presented  to,  s  ;  uncon- 
tested election,  58  ;  on  public  lands, 

233- 
Water  powers,  advantages  of,  170. 
West,   the,  local  government  in.     See 

Counties,   Towns,    and    States,  by 

name. 
West  Florida,  area,  235. 
West  Virginia,  a  Slave  State,  271. 
Wheeling,  causes  of  growth,  172. 
Williams,  Roger,  on  Providence  town 

meetings,  140. 
Willis,    Mr.,  Chairman   of  River  and 

Harbor   Committee,    210,   213,   215, 

216,  217,  219,  221. 
Wilmington,  Mass.,  dislikes  railroads, 

177. 
Wilmington,  N.  C,  excess  of  negroes, 

194. 
Wilson,  a  cavalry  commander,  292. 
Winston  County,  Ala.,  286. 
Wisconsin,  county  government  in,  147, 

Wisconsin     River,    improvement    of, 

227. 
Wobum,  dislikes  railroads,  177. 
Women   suffrage,  24  ;    in   Wyoming, 

64  :  excess   of   foreign    bom,     199  ; 

effect  of  foreign  immigration,  200. 

WELLOWSTONE,  railroad  to,  178. 


Epochs  of  American  History. 

Edited  by  ALBERT  BUSHNELL  HART,  Ph.D., 

Assistant  Professor  of  History  in  Harvard  University. 


MESSRS.  LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &  CO.  take  pleasure  in  announcing 
the  completion  of  their  series  published,  in  three  volumes,  under  the 
general  title  of  Epochs  of  American  History.  Each  volume 
contains  specially  prepared  maps,  working  bibliographies,  and  full  index.  The 
maps  in  the  three  volumes  have  also  been  republished  separately  under  the  title 
Epoch  Maps  Illustrating  American  History.  The  series  is  issued 
under  the  editorship  of  Dr.  Albert  Bushnell  Hart,  Assistant  Professor  of  His- 
tory in  Harvard  University,  as  follows: 

I.  The  Colonies,  1492-1750.  By  Reuben  Gold  Thwaites,  Secretary 
of  the  State  Historical  Society  of  Wisconsin ;  editor  of  the  Wisconsin 
Historical  Collections  ;  author  of  "  Historic  Waterways,"  "  The  Story  of 
Wisconsin,"  etc     With  four  colored  maps,  pp.  xviii,  301.     Cloth,  ^1.25. 

n.  The  Formation  of  the  Union,  1750-1829.  By  Albert  Bush- 
nell Hart,  A.B.,  Ph.D,  Assistant  Professor  of  History  in  Harvard 
University;  member  of  the  Massachusetts  Historical  Society;  author  of 
"  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Federal  Government,"  "  Practical  Essays  on 
American  Government,"  etc.  With  five  colored  maps,  pp.  x.x,  278.  Cloth, 
$1.25. 

in.  Division  and  Reunion,  1829-1889.  By  Woodrow  Wilson, 
Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Jurisprudence  and  Political  Economy  in 
Princeton  University;  author  of  "Congressional  Government,"  "The 
State  —  Elements  of  Historical  and  Practical  Politics,"  etc.  With  five 
colored  maps,  pp.  xix,  326.     Cloth,  ^1.25. 


Epoch  Maps,  illustrating  American  History.  By  Albert  Bush- 
nell Hart,  A.B.,  Ph.D.  Fourteen  colored  maps.  Limp,  oblong,  ^o 
cents  net. 

Every  student  and  teacher  must  be  thankful  to  Professor  Hart  for  bis  "Epoch 
Maps."  They  bear  witness  to  an  immense  amoimt  of  well-directed  research  among  the 
sources.  —  Natioji,  N.  Y. 


LONGMANS,  GREEN,  &  CO.,  Publishers, 

15  East  Sixteenth  Street,  New  York. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


^^AR  9  m7 

FED  1  ^  nm^ 

i\iOV^7l959 


ffl'RfCi 


:sn(8M0AT€i 


EMBJ;§to^ 


p^T^'  3  A 


rEC'OLO'v^mM' 


^  *^ll.P^^^f^Yt9S 


EIFX 


Form  L9-25m-9,'47(A5618)444 


UNIVERSITY  of  CALIFORNIA 

AT 

LOS  ANGELES 


T  TDD  ADV 


AA    000  582  790    2 


JK 

421 

H25p 


